METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane database were systematically searched. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) English articles, (2) noncomparative study or relevant study reporting clinical and/or stability results, and (3) timing of the ACL reconstruction as a primary objective. Study type, level of evidence, randomization method, exclusion criteria, number of cases, age, sex, timing of ACL reconstruction, follow-up, clinical outcomes, stability outcomes, and other relevant findings were recorded. Statistical analysis of the Lysholm scores and KT-1000 arthrometer measurements after early and delayed ACL reconstruction was performed using R version 3.3.1.
RESULTS: Seven articles were included in the final analysis. There were 6 randomized controlled trials and 1 Level II study. Pooled analysis was performed using only Level I studies. All studies assessed the timing of ACL reconstruction as a primary objective. The definition of early ranged broadly from 9 days to 5 months and delayed ranged from 10 weeks to >24 months, and there was an overlap of the time intervals between some studies. The standard timing of the delayed reconstruction was around 10 weeks from injury in the pooled analysis. After pooling of data, clinical result was not statistically different between groups (I2: 47%, moderate level of heterogeneity). No statistically significant difference was observed in the KT-1000 arthrometer measurements between groups (I2: 76.2%, high level of heterogeneity) either.
CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis performed using currently available high-quality literature provides relatively strong evidence that early ACL reconstruction results in good clinical and stability outcomes. Early ACL reconstruction results in comparable clinical and stability outcomes compared with delayed ACL reconstruction.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, a systematic review and meta-analysis of Level I and II studies.
OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the effectiveness of the UDP in the last 6 wk of rehabilitation.
DESIGN: Pre-post study with 2-tailed paired t tests for limited a priori comparisons to examine differences.
SETTING: National Sports Institute of Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: 24 Malaysian national athletes.
INTERVENTIONS: 7 sessions/wk of 90 min with 3 sessions allocated for 5 or 6 UDP exercises.
MAIN OUTCOMES: Significant improvements for men and women were noted. Tests included 20-m sprint, 1-repetition-maximum single-leg press, standing long jump, single-leg sway, and a psychological questionnaire.
RESULTS: For men and women, respectively, average strength improvements of 22% (d = 0.96) and 29% (d = 1.05), sprint time of 3% (d = 1.06) and 4% (d = 0.58), and distance jumped of 4% (d = 0.59) and 6% (d = 0.47) were noted. In addition, athletes reported improved perceived confidence in their abilities. All athletes improved in each functional test except for long jump in 2 of the athletes. Mediolateral sway decreased in 18 of the 22 athletes for the injured limb.
CONCLUSION: The prevention training with UDP resulted in improved conditioning and seems to decrease mediolateral sway.