Advertisement

Psychological factors are associated with return to pre-injury levels of sport and physical activity after ACL reconstruction

  • Shelby E. BaezEmail author
  • Matthew C. Hoch
  • Johanna M. Hoch
KNEE

Abstract

Purpose

The impetus of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is to allow patients to return to sport and to remain engaged in physical activity. Many patients exhibit deficits in psychological domains of health-related quality of life which may impede return to sport and physical activity participation. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the association of patient-based, specifically psychological, and functional outcomes with return to sport and physical activity.

Methods

Forty participants, a minimum of 1-year post-ACLR, reported to the laboratory for one-testing session. Participants completed a series of patient-based and functional outcome assessments. Participants were also instructed to wear a pedometer for 1 week to monitor their daily steps.

Results

Twenty-five participants (62%) did not return to sport and 29 participants (72%) did not average 10,000 steps per day. Individuals with elevated levels of self-reported kinesiophobia were 17% less likely to return to sport. Self-reported knee self-efficacy and knee-related quality of life accounted for 27.1% of the variance of average daily step counts.

Conclusions

Psychological factors, specifically injury-related fear and self-efficacy, were associated more significantly than functional outcomes with return to sport and physical activity levels. Clinicians should examine psychological factors throughout rehabilitation in patients after ACLR. Future research should explore the effectiveness of psychoeducation techniques to decrease injury-related fear and enhance self-efficacy in this population.

Level of evidence

III.

Keywords

Physical activity Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction Return to sport Pedometer Step counts 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This publication was supported by the Mid-Atlantic Athletic Trainers’ Association Research and Grants Awards. Its contents are the authors’ sole responsibility and do not necessarily represent official Mid-Atlantic Athletic Trainers’ Association Research and Grant Awards views.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Funding

The authors received funding for this study through the Mid-Atlantic Athletic Trainers' Research and Grants Awards.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by Old Dominion University (16-213) and the University of Kentucky's (43341) Institutional Review Boards. All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutions.

References

  1. 1.
    Ardern CL, Kvist J, Webster KE (2016) Psychological aspects of anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Oper Tech Sports Med 24(1):77–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ardern CL, Taylor NF, Feller JA, Webster KE (2014) Fifty-five percent return to competitive sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis including aspects of physical functioning and contextual factors. Br J Sports Med 48(21):1543–1552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ardern CL, Webster KE, Taylor NF, Feller JA (2011) Return to sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the state of play. Br J Sports Med 45(7):596–6064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bell DR, Pfeiffer KA, Cadmus-Bertram LA, Trigsted SM, Kelly A, Post EG et al (2017) Objectively measured physical activity in patients after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 45(8):1893–1900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buckthorpe M (2019) Optimising the late-stage rehabilitation and return-to-sport training and testing process after ACL reconstruction. Sports Med.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-019-01102-z Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burland JP, Toonstra J, Werner JL, Mattacola CG, Howell DM, Howard JS (2018) Decision to return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, part I: a qualitative investigation of psychosocial factors. J Athl Train 53(5):452–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Childs JD, Cleland JA (2006) Development and application of clinical prediction rules to improve decision making in physical therapist practice. Phys Ther 86(1):122–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Concato J, Feinstein AR, Holford TR (1993) The risk of determining risk with multivariable models. Ann Intern Med 118(3):201–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Edlund M, Tancredi LR (1985) Quality of life: an ideological critique. Perspect Biol Med 28(4):591–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Filbay SR, Crossley KM, Ackerman IN (2016) Activity preferences, lifestyle modifications and re-injury fears influence longer-term quality of life in people with knee symptoms following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a qualitative study. J Physiother 62(2):103–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gokeler A, Welling W, Zaffagnini S, Seil R, Padua D (2016) Development of a test battery to enhance safe return to sports after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(1):192–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Houston M, Hoch J, Lunen B, Hoch M, Houston MN, Hoch JM et al (2015) The development of summary components for the Disablement in the Physically Active scale in collegiate athletes. Qual Life Res 24(11):2657–2662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Howard JS, Mattacola CG, Howell DM, Lattermann C (2011) Response shift theory: an application for health-related quality of life in rehabilitation research and practice. J Allied Health 40(1):31–38Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hubbard-Turner T (2015) Physical activity levels in college students with chronic ankle instability. J Athl Train 50(7):742–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kuenze C, Cadmus-Bertram L, Pfieffer K, Trigsted S, Cook D, Lisee C et al (2018) Relationship between physical activity and clinical outcomes after ACL reconstruction. J Sports Rehabil 28(2):180–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Norte GE, Solaas H, Saliba SA, Goetschius J, Slater LV, Hart JM (2019) The relationships between kinesiophobia and clinical outcomes after ACL reconstruction differ by self-reported physical activity engagement. Phys Ther Sport.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ptsp.2019.08.002 Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Padua DA, Boling MC, DiStefano LJ, Onate JA, Beutler AI, Marshall SW (2011) Reliability of the landing error scoring system-real time, a clinical assessment tool of jump-landing biomechanics. J Sports Rehabil 20(2):145–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Paterno MV, Flynn K, Thomas S, Schmitt LC (2017) Self-reported fear predicts functional performance and second ACL injury after ACL reconstruction and return to sport: a pilot study. Sports Health 10(3):228–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Piva SR, Fitzgerald GK, Irrgang JJ, Fritz JM, Wisniewski S, McGinty GT et al (2009) Associates of physical function and pain in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 90(2):285–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon B (1998) Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)—development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 28(2):88–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sullivan MJL, Bishop SR, Pivik J (1995) The pain catastrophizing scale: development and validation. Psychol Assess 7(4):524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tegner Y, Lysholm J (1985) Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res 198:42–49Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thomeé P, Währborg P, Börjesson M, Thomeé R, Eriksson BI, Karlsson J (2006) A new instrument for measuring self-efficacy in patients with an anterior cruciate ligament injury. Scan J Med Sci Sports 16(3):181–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thomeé P, Währborg P, Börjesson M, Thomeé R, Eriksson BI, Karlsson J (2008) Self-efficacy of knee function as a pre-operative predictor of outcome 1 year after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16(2):118–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    US Department of Health and Human Services (2008) 2008 physical activity guidelines for Americans. https://health.gov/paguidelines/pdf/paguide.pdf. Accessed 8 Oct 2016.
  26. 26.
    Waddell G, Newton M, Henderson I, Somerville D, Main CJ (1993) A Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability. Pain 52(2):157–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Woby SR, Roach NK, Urmston M, Watson PJ (2005) Psychometric properties of the TSK-11: a shortened version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia. Pain 117(1):137–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Kinesiology at Michigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  2. 2.Division of Athletic Training at the University of KentuckyLexingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations