Search

Background: Reviews on superior labral anterior to posterior (SLAP) injuries have been reported in the literature. However, current reviews have not focused on the success of athletes return to their previous level of sport or athletic performance. Hypothesis/Purpose: Systematically review return to sport (RTS) and return to sport at previous level (RTSP) proportions after SLAP injury while reporting any additional performance metrics and outcome measures. Study Design: Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis. Methods: A computer assisted literature search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase and SportDiscus databases utilizing keywords related to RTS post-surgery for SLAP tear was implemented. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were utilized for study methodology. Quality assessment utilized the MINORS scale. Results: Twenty-two studies (617 athletes) qualified for analysis. Based on limited evidence from level 3b to 4 studies, athletes RTS post intervention for SLAP injury occurred at a rate of 93% (95% CI:87 to 98%) and overall RTSP rate was 72% (95% CI:60 to 83%). The mean time to RTS post intervention was reported in 59% of studies at 6.9±2.9 months. Patient reported outcome measures (PROM's) were reported in 86% of studies. There was limited reporting of performance statistics, rehabilitation guidelines, return to sport criteria, and information regarding SLAP diagnosis in the available studies. None of the included studies reported post-surgical athletic performance or career longevity. Conclusions: Limited evidence suggests that less than three in four athletes return to their previous level of sport participation after SLAP injury intervention. Treatment success for an athlete with SLAP injury remains relatively unknown as only 59% of included studies clearly delineate RTS from RTSP and neither athletic performance nor career longevity were reported in any included studies. Future studies of higher quality are required for this determination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Lever sign has gained recent notoriety for its purported anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) diagnostics and simplicity of performance. Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to summarize the diagnostic accuracy of the Lever sign for use during assessment of the knee for an ACL tear in subjects with suspected acute and chronic knee injury. Study Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis Methods: A computer-assisted literature search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases using keywords related to diagnostic accuracy of the knee joint. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used for the search and reporting phases of the study. Quality assessment of bias and applicability was conducted using the Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS). Mixed effects models were used to summarize accuracy. Results: Eight articles, with only two demonstrating high quality, were included. Six of the articles were included in a metaanalysis. Diagnostic values, utilizing arthroscopy as a gold standard, were: pooled SN 0.55 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.84), pooled SP 0.89 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.99), positive likelihood ratio (+LR) 9.2 (95% CI 0.70 to 46.1), negative likelihood ratio (-LR) 0.58 (95% CI 0.18 to 1.28). Post-test probability with a positive finding (57% sampling prevalence) reached 92% (95% CI 83 to 97%). Post-test probability with a negative finding (57% sampling prevalence) reached 43% (95% CI 39 to 47%). Conclusions: Based on limited evidence of heterogeneous methodological quality, the Lever sign can moderately change posttest probability to rule in an ACL tear. These results should be interpreted cautiously due to a limited number of studies, with small sample sizes and study quality affecting test accuracy. Future investigation should be expanded to include additional high-quality studies examining diverse clinical contexts, as they become available, to enable a more comprehensive clinical examination of this test. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Case Report Background and Purpose: The purpose of this case report is to describe the clinical reasoning process involved with the differential diagnosis and management of a 69 year-old male runner reporting a six month history of insidious onset of left sided low back and buttock pain of low to medium degree of irritability. The case presented describes the utilization of clinical reasoning by a clinician in fellowship training when a patient with atypical adverse neurodynamic dysfunction related to running was encountered. Case Description: The patient's physical examination was relatively unremarkable. Assessment of the patient's subjective history, self-report measures [Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), global rating of change scale (GROC)], objective findings, and tests and measures led to a working diagnosis of atypical adverse peripheral neurodynamic dysfunction. The lumbar spine, sacroiliac joint, hip joint and lower extremity were ruled out by a comprehensive subjective and objective examination. The diagnosis of adverse neurodynamic dysfunction became a diagnosis of exclusion. Outcomes: Returning two and a half weeks after initial evaluation the patient reported no pain with running. Twelve weeks after the initiation of physical therapy, the patient was contacted via email. He was sent, and asked to fill out an ODI. The patient demonstrated an improvement in ODI from 10% to 2%. He also reported that he continued to run after treatment without pain. Discussion: Determining the source of a patient complaint can occasionally be an arduous undertaking. Pathological sources of a patient's symptoms may not be easily determined. Development of differential diagnosis and clinical reasoning skills is imperative. Improving clinical reasoning skills requires deliberate practice through reflective thinking before, during, and after patient interactions. Refinement of these skills leads to the primary goal of identifying the patient's clinical presentation, thus matching it with the most effective treatment approach. Level of evidence: Level 4 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evidence-based clinical examination and assessment of the athlete with hip joint related pain is complex. It requires a systematic approach to properly differentially diagnose competing potential causes of athletic pain generation. An approach with an initial broad focus (and hence use of highly sensitive tests/measures) that then is followed by utilizing more specific tests/measures to pare down this imprecise differential diagnosis list is suggested. Physical assessment measures are then suggested to discern impairments, activity and participation restrictions for athletes with hip-join related pain, hence guiding the proper treatment approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Restricted hip mobility has shown strong correlation with various pathologies of the hip, lumbar spine and lower extremity. Restricted mobility can consequently have deleterious effects not only at the involved joint but throughout the entire kinetic chain. Promising findings are suggesting benefit with skilled joint mobilization intervention for clients with various hip pathologies. Supervised home program intervention, while lacking specifically for the hip joint, are demonstrating promising results in other regions of the body. Application of an accompanying home program for the purpose of complementing skilled, in clinic intervention is advisable for those clients that respond favorably to such methodology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Determine the reliability of two different modified (MOD1 and MOD2) testing methods compared to a standard method (ST) for testing trunk flexion and extension endurance. Participants: Twenty-eight healthy individuals (age 26.4 ± 3.2 years, height 1.75 ± m, weight 71.8 ± 10.3 kg, body mass index 23.6 ± 3.4 m/kg2). Method: Trunk endurance time was measured in seconds for flexion and extension under the three different stabilization conditions. The MOD1 testing procedure utilized a female clinician (70.3 kg) and MOD2 utilized a male clinician (90.7 kg) to provide stabilization as opposed to the ST method of belt stabilization. Results: No significant differences occurred between flexion and extension times. Intraclass correlations (ICCs3,1) for the different testing conditions ranged from .79 to .95 (p <.000) and are found in Table 3. Concurrent validity using the ST flexion times as the gold standard coefficients were .95 for MOD1 and .90 for MOD2. For ST extension, coefficients were .91 and .80, for MOD1 and MOD2 respectively (p <.01). Conclusions: These methods proved to be a reliable substitute for previously accepted ST testing methods in normal college-aged individuals. These modified testing procedures can be implemented in athletic training rooms and weight rooms lacking appropriate tables for the ST testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose/Background: Medial shin pain (MSP) is a common complaint that may stop an athlete from running. No previous study has identified deficits in pelvic, hip or knee motion as potential contributing factors to MSP. The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences in kinematics during running between uninjured athletes and those with MSP. Secondary analyses investigated differences in limbs between groups and differences between sexes. Methods: This case-control study investigated fourteen runners aged 18-40 years old with a history of unilateral MSP and fourteen runner controls. Three dimensional lower quarter kinematics were captured as runners ran on a treadmill. Specifically, peak hip internal rotation (IR), frontal plane pelvic tilt (PT) excursion, and knee flexion were examined. Results: Groups were similar in age, mass, height, and training mileage. Subjects with a history of MSP demonstrated significantly greater frontal plane PT (P = 0.002, Effect size = 0.55) and peak hip IR (P = 0.004, Effect size = 0.51); and less knee flexion (P = 0.02, Effect size = 0.46) than the control group. No significant difference was found in kinematics of the MSP group during their involved side stance phase as compared to their noninvolved side. Conclusions: Runners with MSP displayed greater PT excursion, peak hip IR, and decreased knee flexion while running as compared to a control group. These results should help guide treatment for the running athlete that experiences MSP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: Rehabilitation and strength and conditioning are often seen as two separate entities in athletic injury recovery. Traditionally an athlete progresses from the rehabilitation environment under the care of a physical therapist and/or athletic trainer to the strength and conditioning coach for specific return to sport training. These two facets of return to sport are often considered to have separate goals. Initial goals of each are often different due to the timing of their implementation encompassing different stages of post-injury recovery. The initial focus of post injury rehabilitation includes alleviation of dysfunction, enhancement of tissue healing, and provision of a systematic progression of range-of-motion and strength. During the return to function phases, specific return to play goals are paramount. Understanding of specific principles and program parameters is necessary when designing and implementing an athlete's rehabilitation program. Communication and collaboration amongst all individuals caring for the athlete is a must. The purpose of this review is to outline the current evidence supporting utilization of training principles in athletic rehabilitation, as well as provide suggested implementation of such principles throughout different phases of a proposed rehabilitation program. Evidence Acquisition: The following electronic databases were used to identify research relevant to this clinical commentary: MEDLINE (from 1950-June 2011) and CINAHL (1982-June 2011), for all relevant journal articles written in English. Additional references were accrued by independent searching of references from relevant articles. Results: Currently evidence is lacking in the integration of strength and conditioning principles into the rehabilitation program for the injured athlete. Numerous methods are suggested for possible utilization by the clinician in practice to improve strength, power, speed, endurance, and metabolic capacity. Conclusion: Despite abundance of information on the implementation of training principles in the strength and conditioning field, investigation regarding the use of these principles in a properly designed rehabilitation program is lacking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: Rehabilitation and strength and conditioning are often seen as two separate entities in athletic injury recovery. Traditionally an athlete progresses from the rehabilitation environment under the care of a physical therapist and/or athletic trainer to the strength and conditioning coach for specific return to sport training. These two facets of return to sport are often considered to have separate goals. Initial goals of each are often different due to the timing of their implementation encompassing different stages of post-injury recovery. The initial focus of post injury rehabilitation includes alleviation of dysfunction, enhancement of tissue healing, and provision of a systematic progression of range-of-motion and strength. During the return to function phases, specific return to play goals are paramount. Understanding of specific principles and program parameters is necessary when designing and implementing an athlete's rehabilitation program. Communication and collaboration amongst all individuals caring for the athlete is a must. The purpose of this review is to outline the current evidence supporting utilization of training principles in athletic rehabilitation, as well as provide suggested implementation of such principles throughout different phases of a proposed rehabilitation program. Evidence Acquisition: The following electronic databases were used to identify research relevant to this clinical commentary: MEDLINE (from 1950-June 2011) and CINAHL (1982-June 2011), for all relevant journal articles written in English. Additional references were accrued by independent searching of references from relevant articles. Results: Currently evidence is lacking in the integration of strength and conditioning principles into the rehabilitation program for the injured athlete. Numerous methods are suggested for possible utilization by the clinician in practice to improve strength, power, speed, endurance, and metabolic capacity. Conclusion: Despite abundance of information on the implementation of training principles in the strength and conditioning field, investigation regarding the use of these principles in a properly designed rehabilitation program is lacking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The benefits and proposed physiological mechanisms of eccentric exercise have previously been elucidated and eccentric exercise has been used for well over seventy years. Traditionally, eccentric exercise has been used as a regular component of strength training. However, in recent years, eccentric exercise has been used in rehabilitation to manage a host of conditions. Of note, there is evidence in the literature supporting eccentric exercise for the rehabilitation of tendinopathies, muscle strains, and in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rehabilitation. The purpose of this Clinical Commentary is to discuss the physiologic mechanism of eccentric exercise as well as to review the literature regarding the utilization of eccentric training during rehabilitation. A secondary purpose of this commentary is to provide the reader with a framework for the implementation of eccentric training during rehabilitation of tendinopathies, muscle strains, and after ACL reconstruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The benefits and proposed physiological mechanisms of eccentric exercise have previously been elucidated and eccentric exercise has been used for well over seventy years. Traditionally, eccentric exercise has been used as a regular component of strength training. However, in recent years, eccentric exercise has been used in rehabilitation to manage a host of conditions. Of note, there is evidence in the literature supporting eccentric exercise for the rehabilitation of tendinopathies, muscle strains, and in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rehabilitation. The purpose of this Clinical Commentary is to discuss the physiologic mechanism of eccentric exercise as well as to review the literature regarding the utilization of eccentric training during rehabilitation. A secondary purpose of this commentary is to provide the reader with a framework for the implementation of eccentric training during rehabilitation of tendinopathies, muscle strains, and after ACL reconstruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]