THE EFFECTS OF PREOPERATIVE BLOOD FLOW RESTRICTION TRAINING IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Arthrogenic muscle inhibition (AMI) involving the quadricep femoris (QF) muscle group is a common finding in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, particularly in Canada where wait times for elective surgery are lengthy. In order to combat the challenges of AMI for patients with an ACL injury, blood flow restriction (BFR) training has become an effective new training modality for the rehabilitation of these patients. This has been shown to have beneficial effects in the post-operative period by reducing QF atrophy. However, the use of BFR in the pre-operative setting has yet to be well established. The specific aims of this study were to determine if preconditioning with BFR training in patients awaiting ACL surgery (1) improves QF muscle strength testing and (2) reduces QF muscle group atrophy. We hypothesized that preconditioning with BFR in patients awaiting ACL reconstruction has a beneficial effect on clinical outcomes prior to surgery. All patients over the age of 18 who had a clinical and radiological diagnosis of isolated complete ACL injury and were awaiting surgical intervention were considered eligible for the study. Eligible patients were randomized into the BFR or CONTROL groups. All patients attended 12 physiotherapy sessions involving closed kinetic chain exercises on the affected leg using a leg press machine. The BFR tourniquet was inflated throughout the protocol for the BFR group and left deflated for the CONTROL group. Objective quadriceps and hamstring strength assessments using a Biodex machine were performed at the beginning of the study and at the completion of physiotherapy. Both the affected leg (ACL injury) and unaffected leg (control leg) were evaluated. This study compared pre-intervention vs. post-intervention differences between the two groups. Our primary outcome measure was peak torque (ft-lbs) measured for both knee flexion and extension. Our secondary outcome measures included thigh circumference (mm) and patient reported outcome measures (KOOS and SF-12). To date, 30 of 32 patients have been enrolled in the study and 21 of 32 patients have completed the protocol (BFR = 14, CONTROL = 7). Biodex testing has demonstrated an average increase in affected knee extension strength of 15% and 27% for the BFR and CONTROL groups respectively. Additionally, unaffected knee extension strength increased by 9% in the BFR group and 12% in the CONTROL group. Thigh circumference of the affected knee increased by an average of 9 mm in the BFR group and 15 mm in the CONTROL group. No reported complications or negative effects involving BFR have been reported. Preliminary results have demonstrated an overall strength increase in both BFR and CONTROL groups. The affected knee in both treatment groups have exhibited a greater increase in strength compared to the unaffected knee. No significant statistical differences between the two treatment groups have been noted thus far. This may be attributable to a small sample size and lack of CONTROL patients that have completed the study. Further statistical analysis and comparison between groups is pending upon completion of all 32 patients. If BFR in the pre-operative setting can be shown to provide beneficial effects, it will be a valuable tool in the treatment of AMI among patients with ACL injury.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».