MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283763095 · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2022-105495

Rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament and meniscal injuries: a best-evidence synthesis of systematic reviews for the OPTIKNEE consensus

2022· review· en· W4283763095 on OpenAlexaff
Adam G Culvenor, M. Girdwood, Carsten Bogh Juhl, Brooke Patterson, M. Haberfield, Pætur Mikal Holm, Alessio Bricca, Jackie L. Whittaker, Ewa M. Roos, Kay M. Crossley

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsResearch CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRehabilitationAnterior cruciate ligamentAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesSystematic reviewPhysical medicine and rehabilitationEvidence-based medicinePhysical therapyMEDLINESurgeryAlternative medicinePathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Synthesise evidence for effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions following ACL and/or meniscal tear on symptomatic, functional, clinical, psychosocial, quality of life and reinjury outcomes. DESIGN: Overview of systematic reviews with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation certainty of evidence. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and Cochrane Library. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials investigating rehabilitation interventions following ACL and/or meniscal tears in young adults. RESULTS: We included 22 systematic reviews (142 trials of mostly men) evaluating ACL-injured individuals and none evaluating isolated meniscal injuries. We synthesised data from 16 reviews evaluating 12 different interventions. Moderate-certainty evidence was observed for: (1) neuromuscular electrical stimulation to improve quadriceps strength; (2) open versus closed kinetic chain exercises to be similarly effective for quadriceps strength and self-reported function; (3) structured home-based versus structured in-person rehabilitation to be similarly effective for quadriceps and hamstring strength and self-reported function; and (4) postoperative knee bracing being ineffective for physical function and laxity. There was low-certainty evidence that: (1) preoperative exercise therapy improves self-reported and physical function postoperatively; (2) cryotherapy reduces pain and analgesic use; (3) psychological interventions improve anxiety/fear; and (4) whole body vibration improves quadriceps strength. There was very low-certainty evidence that: (1) protein-based supplements improve quadriceps size; (2) blood flow restriction training improves quadriceps size; (3) neuromuscular control exercises improve quadriceps and hamstring strength and self-reported function; and (4) continuous passive motion has no effect on range of motion. CONCLUSION: The general level of evidence for rehabilitation after ACL or meniscal tear was low. Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that several rehabilitation types can improve quadriceps strength, while brace use has no effect on knee function/laxity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations117
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207