Knee valgus proprioception, muscle activity, patient-reported outcomes and dynamic balance control after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cross-sectional case-control study.

IF 4.4 Q2 Medicine
Mengde Lyu, Adrian Pranata, Joshua Farragher, Jinglei Huang, Huaibin Qian, Roger Adams, Weixin Zhang, Ji Sun, Qingrong Xu, Jia Han, Evangelos Pappas
{"title":"Knee valgus proprioception, muscle activity, patient-reported outcomes and dynamic balance control after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cross-sectional case-control study.","authors":"Mengde Lyu, Adrian Pranata, Joshua Farragher, Jinglei Huang, Huaibin Qian, Roger Adams, Weixin Zhang, Ji Sun, Qingrong Xu, Jia Han, Evangelos Pappas","doi":"10.1186/s43019-026-00341-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Proprioceptive deficits following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are commonly assessed using sagittal-plane, nonweight-bearing tasks that may not reflect the demands of functional activities. This study evaluated the test-retest reliability and discriminative validity of a weight-bearing knee valgus discrimination task (Knee-VEDA) and compared proprioceptive acuity, muscle activity, dynamic balance, and patient-reported outcomes between individuals with ACLR and healthy controls.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-three participants (32 ACLR, 31 controls) performed the Knee-VEDA with concurrent surface electromyography (sEMG) of seven lower-limb muscles. Test-retest reliability was assessed. Dynamic balance and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using the Y-Balance Test, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Knee-VEDA demonstrated acceptable-to-good test-retest reliability (ACLR ICC = 0.84; controls ICC = 0.64) and acceptable discriminative validity (AUC = 0.835, p < 0.001). The ACLR group exhibited significantly poorer proprioception in the operated limb compared with their intact limb and controls (p < 0.001). sEMG analysis revealed not statistically significant between-group differences in lower-limb muscle activity. ACLR participants also demonstrated inferior Y-Balance performance compared with controls (<sub>p</sub> = 0.02). In the ACLR group, better Knee-VEDA scores correlated with better Y-Balance (<sub>r</sub> = 0.50, p < 0.001), and better KOOS symptoms scores (<sub>r</sub> = 0.55, <sub>p</sub> = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Knee-VEDA may be a useful tool for assessing weight-bearing knee proprioception after ACLR, showing acceptable test-retest reliability and discriminative validity. After ACL reconstruction, operated-limb proprioceptive acuity was found to be reduced during the valgus task. Further validation is needed before clinical application.</p>","PeriodicalId":36317,"journal":{"name":"Knee Surgery and Related Research","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13491738/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knee Surgery and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-026-00341-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Proprioceptive deficits following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are commonly assessed using sagittal-plane, nonweight-bearing tasks that may not reflect the demands of functional activities. This study evaluated the test-retest reliability and discriminative validity of a weight-bearing knee valgus discrimination task (Knee-VEDA) and compared proprioceptive acuity, muscle activity, dynamic balance, and patient-reported outcomes between individuals with ACLR and healthy controls.

Methods: Sixty-three participants (32 ACLR, 31 controls) performed the Knee-VEDA with concurrent surface electromyography (sEMG) of seven lower-limb muscles. Test-retest reliability was assessed. Dynamic balance and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using the Y-Balance Test, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).

Results: The Knee-VEDA demonstrated acceptable-to-good test-retest reliability (ACLR ICC = 0.84; controls ICC = 0.64) and acceptable discriminative validity (AUC = 0.835, p < 0.001). The ACLR group exhibited significantly poorer proprioception in the operated limb compared with their intact limb and controls (p < 0.001). sEMG analysis revealed not statistically significant between-group differences in lower-limb muscle activity. ACLR participants also demonstrated inferior Y-Balance performance compared with controls (p = 0.02). In the ACLR group, better Knee-VEDA scores correlated with better Y-Balance (r = 0.50, p < 0.001), and better KOOS symptoms scores (r = 0.55, p = 0.001).

Conclusions: The Knee-VEDA may be a useful tool for assessing weight-bearing knee proprioception after ACLR, showing acceptable test-retest reliability and discriminative validity. After ACL reconstruction, operated-limb proprioceptive acuity was found to be reduced during the valgus task. Further validation is needed before clinical application.

前交叉韧带重建后,膝关节外翻本体感觉、肌肉活动、患者报告的结果和动态平衡控制:一项横断面病例对照研究。
背景:前交叉韧带重建(ACLR)后的本体感觉缺陷通常通过矢状面评估,非负重任务可能不能反映功能活动的需求。本研究评估了负重膝外翻鉴别任务(knee - veda)的重测信度和判别效度,并比较了ACLR患者和健康对照者的本体感觉敏锐度、肌肉活动、动态平衡和患者报告的结果。方法:63名参与者(32名ACLR, 31名对照组)在同时进行7块下肢肌肉表面肌电图(sEMG)的情况下进行膝关节veda。评估重测信度。使用Y-Balance试验、国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)表格和膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分(oos)评估动态平衡和患者报告的结果。结果:Knee-VEDA具有可接受到良好的重测信度(ACLR ICC = 0.84,对照组ICC = 0.64)和可接受的判别效度(AUC = 0.835, p p = 0.02)。在ACLR组中,更好的膝关节veda评分与更好的Y-Balance相关(r = 0.50, p r = 0.55, p = 0.001)。结论:膝关节veda可能是评估ACLR术后负重膝关节本体感觉的有用工具,具有可接受的重测信度和判别效度。在前交叉韧带重建后,外翻任务中发现手术肢体本体感觉敏锐度降低。在临床应用前需要进一步验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
19 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书