Follow-up Treatment after Cartilage Therapy of the Knee Joint - a Recommendation of the DGOU Clinical Tissue Regeneration Working Group. / Nachbehandlung nach Knorpeltherapie am Kniegelenk ­ eine Empfehlung der AG Klinische Geweberegeneration der DGOU.

The first follow-up treatment recommendation from the DGOU's Clinical Tissue Regeneration working group dates back to 2012. New scientific evidence and changed framework conditions made it necessary to update the follow-up treatment recommendations after cartilage therapy.As part of a multi-stage member survey, a consensus was reached which, together with the scientific evidence, provides the basis for the present follow-up treatment recommendation.The decisive criterion for follow-up treatment is still the defect localisation. A distinction is made between femorotibial and patellofemoral defects. In addition, further criteria regarding cartilage defects are now also taken into account (stable cartilage edge, location outside the main stress zone) and the different methods of cartilage therapy (e. g. osteochondral transplantation, minced cartilage) are discussed.The present updated recommendation includes different aspects of follow-up treatment, starting with early perioperative management through to sports clearance and resumption of contact sports after cartilage therapy has taken place.

Feasibility, Reliability, and Validity of the Modified Forward Hop Test After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Double- Instead of Single-legged Landing is Reliable and Results in Greater Hopping Distance.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility, reliability, and validity of the Modified forward hop (MFH) test in participants after ACL reconstruction (ACLR). DESIGN: Reliability study. SETTING: Assessments were administered at different clinical locations in Germany and Switzerland by the same 2 investigators. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-eight active individuals participated in this study (N=48). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The participants performed MFHs and Forward hops for distance in a predetermined order. The feasibility of the MFH was quantified with proportions of successfully executed attempts and Pearson's χ2 test. Its reliability was estimated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM). Test validity was explored using Pearson's product moment correlation analyses. RESULTS: Fewer failed attempts were recorded among the participants (age: 30 [Standard deviation 11] years; 22 women, 26 (13) months post-surgery) when compared with the Forward hop for distance test (25/288 trials; 9% vs 72/288 trials; 25%). Within-session ICC values were excellent (>0.95) for both types of Forward hop tests, independent of the side examined. The SEM values were comparable between the Modified (injured: 5.6 cm, uninjured: 5.9 cm) and the classic Forward hop (injured: 4.3 cm, uninjured: 7.2 cm). CONCLUSION: The MFH is a feasible, reliable, and valid tool for judging neuromuscular performance after ACLR. If the aim of a hop for distance incorporates enhanced perceived or real landing safety, landing on both feet should be used.

[Function-based tests to determine the return-to-activity state in patients with non-specific low back pain]. / Funktionelle Testungen zur Ermittlung des Return-to-Activity-Status bei Patienten mit unspezifischen Kreuzschmerzen.

BACKGROUND: Most people with back pain suffer from non-specific low back pain, for which no specific reasons can be found. Two out of three have recurrent pain episodes. To reduce the likelihood of recurrence and long-lasting pain, functional tests are increasingly used to determine the current functional status. This literature study evaluates evidence of functional tests in patients with non-specific low back pain and their validity related to the return-to-activity (RTA) status. The objective of this analysis is to give recommendations for specific activities and to assess the risk of chronification and recurrent pain. METHODS: PubMed-based literature search. Narrative review focusing on data from the past ten years. RESULTS: A total of twelve studies were included in the analysis. Overall, 33 different tests were identified for which positive statements regarding reliability, validity and relevance for the assessment of the RTA status in non-specific back pain could be made. The tests identified may be able to provide useful information when assessing the RTA status and to recognise yellow and blue flags in patients with non-specific low back pain. The ability to walk, the behaviour when lifting and carrying objects, motor control, muscle strength and mobility play a particular role. CONCLUSION: The determination of the RTA status in patients with non-specific low back pain should be patient-specific and based on biopsychosocial aspects rather than relying exclusively on movement-related tests. Exact statements regarding the point in time when patients can resume everyday activities and work without an increased risk of recurrence or chronicity do not seem possible with functional tests alone. The major influence of psychological and social factors on disease development, course and prognosis are limiting factors. Movement and strain-related tests can still be used to evaluate activities related to everyday life, to design therapy programs and to give patients confidence.

Do patients with low back pain remember physiotherapists' advice? A mixed-methods study on patient-therapist communication.

OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of this study was to determine if the advice physiotherapists think they provide to patients with low back pain (LBP) is what the patients remember and take away from the clinical encounter. The secondary aim was to determine which factors may influence the retention of this advice. METHODS: The first component of the study used questionnaires completed by patients and therapists after the initial visit. Related questionnaires of patients and therapists were screened for inconsistencies. The second component of the study involved semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Ninety pairs of questionnaires were completed. Therapists provided patients with one (N = 90), two (N = 85) or three (N = 51) items of advice regarding the management of their LBP. All patients remembered the first item of advice, 92% remembered a second, and 67% remembered the third piece of advice. All items of advice were deemed either 'relevant' or 'very relevant' by 97% of the patients. After the analysis of 14 interviews, data saturation was reached. Four themes emerged from the data analysis of the interviews: (a) Evaluation type, (b) Exercise factors, (c) Patient concerns about their diagnosis, and (d) Patient expectations. DISCUSSION: In most cases, patients remembered what therapists told them and considered that the advice provided was relevant. Based on the qualitative data, patients were more likely to remember what therapists said when: (a) shared decision making was used during the initial encounter, (b) prescribed exercises were simple to perform and few in number, (c) patients' concerns about their diagnosis were addressed, and (d) patients' expectations were identified and addressed.

Rehabilitation before regenerative cartilage knee surgery: a new prehabilitation guideline based on the best available evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Focal cartilage defects are an increasingly relevant clinical problem especially in athletes. Cartilage regenerative surgery (CRS) including microfracture and autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) to treat such isolated cartilage defects in the knee joint has been well established in the last two decades. In contradiction to high-level evidence concerning the surgical technique, cell-related issues, and clinical results, the knowledge about the optimal rehabilitation process is still sparse although the importance of optimizing the rehabilitation process has recently led to new research focus in this field. The preoperative time frame may be used to start rehabilitation which may fasten the postoperative recovery and optimize clinical outcome ("Prehabilitation"-PREHAB). The aim of this article, therefore, was to review the available literature on prehabilitation concepts and to present a prehabilitation guideline for CRS patients based on the best evidence available. METHODS: A systemic literature research was conducted on rehabilitation for cartilage regenerative surgery as well as prehabilitation in knee joint procedures. From the available literature a prehabilitation concept was generated and tested in 10 ACI patients. RESULTS: As the literature search found no studies addressing prehabilitation in CRS patients, an evidence-based PREHAB program has been compiled based on the available evidence from (a) studies addressing postoperative rehabilitation in CRS patients and (b) PREHAB studies on other knee procedures including TKA. This presented prehabilitation guideline has been tested in > 50 CRS patients and was found to be feasible as all of the patients showed a good compliance and were able to perform the protocol as suggested. CONCLUSION: The presented PREHAB regimen may serve clinicians as a guideline for early rehabilitation of their CRS patients. Obviously, further research is mandatory to quantify its clinical effect and to demonstrate its cost-effectiveness and benefits in surgically treated patients.

[Standards in rehabilitation following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the German-speaking world]. / Standards in der Nachbehandlung nach vorderem Kreuzbandersatz im deutschsprachigen Raum.

INTRODUCTION: Rehabilitation protocols following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction often differ among orthopaedic surgeons. The primary aim of this study was to investigate which follow-up treatment is recommended by "AGA instructors" certified by the German-speaking Association for Arthroscopic and Open Joint Surgery (AGA). The secondary aim was to compare these findings with the current literature. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A structured anonymous online survey was performed with "AGA instructors" specialised in knee or ACL surgery. All participants were asked about their recommendations for rehabilitation following isolated ACL reconstruction using a questionnaire containing 23 items. RESULTS: 117 out of 218 mail questionnaires were fully completed and analysed. 96.5 % of all surgeons allowed full weight-bearing after 4 weeks or earlier, 52.6 % put a limit on knee flexion, 9.7 % on knee extension after the operation. A brace was prescribed by 82.8 % of all participants. During the first six weeks, isometric training and closed-chain exercises were recommended by the majority of surgeons. Riding a bicycle or driving a car after 6 weeks or earlier was permitted by 78.5 % and 86.2 %, respectively. Jogging (65.5 %) or jumping activities (67.0 %) were allowed after 3 months or earlier. Skiing (53.0 %) or contact/team sport (55.2 % / 46.2 %) was often permitted after 12 months. 82.6 % of all surgeons would like to use return-to-sport test protocols. CONCLUSION: Rehabilitation protocols differ significantly even among experienced knee surgeons working as instructors. Their recommendations are often not evidence-based considering the current literature.

Quadriceps Strength in Patients With Isolated Cartilage Defects of the Knee: Results of Isokinetic Strength Measurements and Their Correlation With Clinical and Functional Results.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have found a significant deficit of maximum quadriceps strength after autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) of the knee. However, it is unclear whether muscular strength deficits in patients with cartilage damage exist prior to operative treatment. PURPOSE: To isokinetically test maximum quadriceps muscle strength and quantify the impact of possible strength deficits on functional and clinical test results. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: To identify clinically relevant muscular strength deficits, 24 patients (5 females, 19 males; mean age, 34.5 years; body mass index, 25.9 kg/m2) with isolated cartilage defects (mean onset, 5.05 years; SD, 7.8 years) in the knee joint underwent isokinetic strength measurements. Maximal quadriceps strength was recorded in 3 different testing modes: pure concentric contraction (flexors and extensors alternating work; con1), concentric-eccentric (only the extensors work concentrically and eccentrically; con2), and eccentric contraction in the alternating mode (ecc). Results were compared for functional performance (single-leg hop test), pain scales (visual analog scale [VAS], numeric rating scale [NRS]), self-reported questionnaires (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scale [KOOS]), and defect size (cm2). RESULTS: Compared with the uninjured leg, significantly lower quadriceps strength was detected in the injured leg in all isokinetic working modes (con1 difference, 27.76 N·m [SD 17.47; P = .003]; con2 difference, 21.45 N·m [SD, 18.45; P =.025]; ecc difference, 29.48 N·m [SD, 21.51; P = .001]), with the largest deficits found for eccentric muscle performance. Moderate negative correlations were observed for the subjective pain scales NRS and VAS. The results of the IKDC and KOOS questionnaires showed low, nonsignificant correlations with findings in the isokinetic measurement. Moreover, defect sizes (mean, 3.13 cm2) were of no importance regarding the prediction of the strength deficit. The quadriceps strength deficit between the injured and the uninjured leg was best predicted by the results of the single-leg hop test. CONCLUSION: Patients with isolated cartilage defects of the knee joint have significant deficits in quadriceps muscle strength of the injured leg compared with the uninjured leg. The single-leg hop test may be used to predict quadriceps strength deficits. Future research should address whether preoperative strength training in patients with cartilage defects of the knee could be effective and should be taken into consideration in addition to surgical treatment.