Altered medial versus lateral hamstring muscle activity during hop testing in female athletes 1–6 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
- 856 Downloads
The purpose of this study was to assess activation patterns of medial (MH) versus lateral (LH) hamstrings in female athletes who had undergone ACL reconstruction (ACLR) using a hamstrings-graft during single-limb functional testing.
Eighteen athletes (1–6 years since ACLR) and 18 healthy controls were recruited from the Icelandic women’s top divisions in football, handball, and basketball. Activation of the MH and LH was monitored bilaterally using surface electromyography. Peak activation of the normalized signal was identified for two phases of the single-limb crossover (SLC) hop test and performance (distance jumped) registered. Self-reported knee symptoms and function were evaluated with the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). A repeated measures general linear model was used for main statistical data analyses, comparing variables of interests between limbs (within-subjects factor) and between groups.
ACLR athletes had worse KOOS-symptoms scores (p < 0.05) than controls, while hop distance was equal. Overall, MH and LH muscle activation levels differed between the two phases of the SLC hop test (p < 0.05). Moreover, inter-limb differences in MH and LH activity were identified between groups (p < 0.05), mainly explained by greater LH than MH activation in the uninjured limb of ACLR athletes.
One to 6 years after ACLR, female athletes performed on par with uninjured controls, but demonstrated inter-limb differences in muscle activation patterns of the hamstrings that were not evident in controls. This may be an important factor to consider during postsurgical rehabilitation in order to lower the risk of a second injury.
Level of evidence
KeywordsACL Function Activation Rehabilitation Electromyography
- 2.Ahlen M, Liden M, Bovaller A, Sernert N, Kartus J (2012) Bilateral magnetic resonance imaging and functional assessment of the semitendinosus and gracilis tendons a minimum of 6 years after ipsilateral harvest for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 40(8):1735–1741PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Brophy RH, Schmitz L, Wright RW, Dunn WR, Parker RD, Andrish JT, McCarty EC, Spindler KP (2012) Return to play and future ACL injury risk after ACL reconstruction in soccer athletes from the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) group. Am J Sports Med 40(11):2517–2522PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Janssen RP, du Mee AW, van Valkenburg J, Sala HA, Tseng CM (2013) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with 4-strand hamstring autograft and accelerated rehabilitation: a 10-year prospective study on clinical results, knee osteoarthritis and its predictors. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(9):1977–1988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Logerstedt D, Grindem H, Lynch A, Eitzen I, Engebretsen L, Risberg MA, Axe MJ, Snyder-Mackler L (2012) Single-legged hop tests as predictors of self-reported knee function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: the Delaware-Oslo ACL cohort study. Am J Sports Med 40(10):2348–2356PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Macleod TD, Snyder-Mackler L, Axe MJ, Buchanan TS (2013) Early regeneration determines long-term graft site morphology and function after reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with semitendinosus-gracilis autograft: a case series. Int J Sports Phys Ther 8(3):256–268PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 23.Oiestad BE, Holm I, Aune AK, Gunderson R, Myklebust G, Engebretsen L, Fosdahl MA, Risberg MA (2010) Knee function and prevalence of knee osteoarthritis after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective study with 10 to 15 years of follow-up. Am J Sports Med 38(11):2201–2210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Persson A, Fjeldsgaard K, Gjertsen JE, Kjellsen AB, Engebretsen L, Hole RM, Fevang JM (2014) Increased risk of revision with hamstring tendon grafts compared with patellar tendon grafts after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a study of 12,643 patients from the Norwegian Cruciate Ligament Registry, 2004–2012. Am J Sports Med 42(2):285–291PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.SENIAM Surface electromyography for the non-invasive assessment of muscles: recommendations for sEMG sensors, sensor placement and location. www.seniam.org
- 39.Tagesson S, Oberg B, Good L, Kvist J (2008) A comprehensive rehabilitation program with quadriceps strengthening in closed versus open kinetic chain exercise in patients with anterior cruciate ligament deficiency: a randomized clinical trial evaluating dynamic tibial translation and muscle function. Am J Sports Med 36(2):298–307PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 41.Tashiro T, Kurosawa H, Kawakami A, Hikita A, Fukui N (2003) Influence of medial hamstring tendon harvest on knee flexor strength after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A detailed evaluation with comparison of single- and double-tendon harvest. Am J Sports Med 31(4):522–529PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar