Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

, Volume 20, Issue 8, pp 1603–1610 | Cite as

Static and dynamic postural control in competitive athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and controls

  • Farshid Mohammadi
  • Mahyar Salavati
  • Behnam Akhbari
  • Masood Mazaheri
  • Mojdeh Khorrami
  • Hossein Negahban



To evaluate the test–retest reliability and compare the static and dynamic postural control values in competitive athletes following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and controls.


Thirty athletes, 8.4 ± 1.8 months after ACL reconstruction, and thirty healthy matched controls were asked to execute single-leg stance and single-legged drop jump tests onto a force plate. Amplitude and velocity in anteroposterior and mediolateral directions, and mean total velocity were measured for static evaluation. Peak vertical ground reaction force (PVGRF) during landing and takeoff and loading rate were measured for dynamic evaluation. To evaluate test–retest reliability, 15 participants of each group repeated the tests 6–8 days after the first session. Mixed model of analysis of variance was used to determine differences between the involved, uninvolved, and control limbs. The test–retest reliability was measured using intraclass correlation coefficient and standard error of measurement.


Greater postural sway has been observed in the operated leg of ACL-reconstructed athletes compared with the non-operated side (P < 0.01) and the matched limb of the control group (P < 0.01). During landing, PVGRF and loading rate on the uninvolved limb of the athletes who had undergone ACL reconstruction were greater in comparison with those of the control group (P < 0.001). Both static and dynamic postural measures have high test–retest reliability, ranging from 0.73 to 0.88.


Static and dynamic postural measures are reliable tests to evaluate functional performance of athletes following ACL reconstruction. Eight months postsurgery, competitive athletes still demonstrated postural asymmetries, compared to matched controls, which might result in their susceptibility to future ACL injury.

Level of evidence

Prognostic study, case-control, Level III.


Posture Balance Anterior cruciate ligament Sport 



The authors wish to acknowledge the staffs of the Ergonomy Lab of the University for their help with data collection. I affirm that I have no financial affiliation (including research funding) or involvement with any commercial organization that has a direct financial interest in any matter included in this manuscript.

Board approval

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee for Health Sciences Research involving human subjects located at University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences.


  1. 1.
    Alonso AC, Greve JMD, Camanho GL (2009) Evaluating the center of gravity of dislocations in soccer players with and without reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament using a balance platform. Clinics 64:163–170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atkinson G, Nevill AM (1998) Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine. Sports Med 26:217–238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aune AK, Hukkanen M, Madsen JE et al (1996) Nerve regeneration during patellar tendon autograft remodeling after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an experimental and clinical study. J Orthop Res 14:193–1999PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barrack RL, Lund PJ, Munn BG et al (1997) Evidence of reinnervation of free patellar tendon autograft used for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 25:196–202PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ben Moussa AZ, Zouita S, Dziri C et al (2009) Single-limb assessment of postural stability and knee functional outcome two years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 52:475–484Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Birmingham TB, Kramer JF, Inglis JT et al (1998) Effect of a neoprene sleeve on knee joint position sense during sitting open kinetic chain and supine closed kinetic chain tests. Am J Sports Med 26:562–566PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Birmingham TB, Kramer JF, Kirkley A et al (2001) Knee bracing after ACL reconstruction: effects on postural control and proprioception. Med Sci Sports Exerc 33:1253–1258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Birmingham TB, Inglis JT, Kramer JF et al (2000) Effect of a neoprene sleeve on knee joint kinesthesis: comparison of active, passive and axially loaded joint angle replication tests. Med Sci Sports Exerc 32:304–308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bollen S (1998) Ligament injuries of the knee: limping forward? Br J Sports Med 32:82–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bonfim TR, Pacolla CAJ, Barela JA (2003) Proprioceptive and behavior impairments in individuals with anterior cruciate ligament reconstructed knees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 84:1217–1223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brunetti O, Filippi GM, Lorenzini M et al (2006) Improvement of posture stability by vibratory stimulation following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:1180–1187PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dauty M, Collon S, Dubois C (2010) Change in posture control after recent knee anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 30:187–191PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dauty M, Dantec P, Collot O et al (2007) Test–retest reproducibility of stabilometric measurements after knee anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in sport subject. Sci Sports 22:87–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Decker MJ, Torry MR, Noonan TJ et al (2002) Landing adaptations after ACL reconstruction. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34:1408–1413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ernst GP, Saliba E, Diduch DR et al (2000) Lower extremity compensations following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Phys Ther 80:251–260PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fremerey RW, Lobenhoffer P, Zeichen J et al (2000) Proprioception after rehabilitation and reconstruction in knees with deficiency of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone J Surg Br 82:801–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ford KR, Myer GD, Hewett TE (2003) Valgus knee motion during landing in high school female and male basketball players. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35:1745–1750PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gokeler A, Hof AL, Arnold MP et al (2010) Abnormal landing strategies after ACL reconstruction. Scand J Med Sci Sports 20:e12–e19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harrison EL, Duenke N, Dunlop R et al (1994) Evaluation of single-limb standing following anterior cruciate ligament surgery and rehabilitation. Phys Ther 74:245–252PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Henriksson M, Ledin T, Good L (2001) Postural control after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and functional rehabilitation. Am J Sports Med 29:359–366PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hewett TE, Myer GD, Ford KR et al (2005) Biomechanical measures of neuromuscular control and valgus loading of the knee predict anterior cruciate ligament injury risk in female athletes: a prospective study. Am J Sports Med 33:492–501PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hoffman M, Schrader J, Koceja D (1999) An investigation of postural control in postoperative anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction patients. J Athl Train 34:130–136PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Howells BE, Ardern CL, Webster KE (2011) Is postural control restored following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(7):1168–1177PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Huston LJ, Vibert B, Ashton-Miller JA et al (2001) Gender differences in knee angle when landing from a drop-jump. Am J Knee Surg 14:215–220PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Johansson H, Sjölander P, Sojka P (1991) A sensory role for the cruciate ligaments. Clin Orthop Relat Res 268:161–178PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mattacola CG, Perrin DH, Gansneder BM et al (2002) Strength, functional outcome, and postural stability after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Athl Train 37:262–268PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    McNitt-Gray JL (2000) Musculoskeletal loading during landing. In: Zatsiorsky VM, IOC Medical Commission International Federation of Sports Medicine, (eds) Biomechanics in sport: performance enhancement and injury prevention. Blackwell, Malden, pp 523–549Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Neitzel JA, Kernozek TW, Davies GJ (2002) Loading response following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction during the parallel squat exercise. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 17:551–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ochi M, Iwasa J, Uchio Y et al (1999) The regeneration of sensory neurones in the reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone J Surg Br 81:902–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ortiz A, Olson S, Libby CL et al (2008) Landing mechanics between noninjured women and women with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction during 2 jump tasks. Am J Sports Med 36:149–157PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Padua DA, Marshall SW, Boling MC et al (2009) The landing error scoring system (LESS) is a valid and reliable clinical assessment tool of jump-landing biomechanics. Am J Sports Med 37:1996–2002PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Paterno MV, Ford KR, Myer GD et al (2007) Limb asymmetries in landing and jumping 2 years following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Clin J Sport Med 17:258–262PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Paterno MV, Schmitt LC, Ford KR et al (2010) Biomechanical measures during landing and postural stability predict second anterior cruciate ligament injury after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and return to sport. Am J Sports Med 38:1968–1978PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ristanis S, Tsepis E, Giotis D et al (2009) Electromechanical delay of the knee flexor muscles is impaired after harvesting hamstring tendons for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 37:2179–2186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Salmon L, Russell V, Musgrove T et al (2005) Incidence and risk factors for graft rupture and contra lateral rupture after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 21:948–957PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shaw T, Chipchase LS, Williams MT (2004) A user’s guide to outcome measurement following ACL reconstruction. Phys Ther Sport 5:57–67Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shelbourne KD, Davis TJ, Klootwyk TE (1998) The relationship between intercondylar notch width of the femur and the incidence of anterior cruciate ligament tears. A prospective study. Am J Sports Med 26:402–408PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Shiraishi M, Mizuta H, Kubota K et al (1996) Stabilometric assessment in the anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knee. Clin J Sport Med 6:32–39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tegner Y, Lysholm J (1985) Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res 198:43–49PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Thomee P, Wahrborg P, Borjesson M et al (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 16:118–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Vairo GL, Myers JB, Sell TC et al (2008) Neuromuscular and biomechanical landing performance subsequent to ipsilateral semitendinosus and gracilis autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16:2–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Farshid Mohammadi
    • 1
  • Mahyar Salavati
    • 1
  • Behnam Akhbari
    • 1
  • Masood Mazaheri
    • 2
  • Mojdeh Khorrami
    • 1
  • Hossein Negahban
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Physical TherapyUniversity of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation SciencesEvin, TehranIran
  2. 2.Musculoskeletal Research CenterIsfahan University of Medical SciencesIsfahanIran
  3. 3.Musculoskeletal Research CenterAhvaz Jundishapur University of Medical SciencesAhvazIran

Personalised recommendations