Abstract
Introduction The technical results after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are evaluated by laxity measures, the functional results by performance tests, and patients’ perception by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). It is unknown whether one of these can represent outcome, or if they should all be reported, and the aim was to analyze this in a cohort one year after primary ACLR.
Method Consecutive adult patients who had an ACLR between 1.1.2019 and 31.12.2021 were offered a one-year follow-up by an independent observer, who measured clinical and instrumented knee stability, range of motion, and results of four different hop tests. Patients completed 4 PROMs (IKDC, KOOS, Lysholm and KNEES-ACL) and Tegner activity scale, reported pain scores and answered anchor questions regarding satisfaction and willingness to repeat the operation. Spearman correlations were calculated between the Lysholm score, IKDC-score, each domain score in KNEES-ACL and KOOS and the other outcome modalities.
Results A total of 190 adults attended the one-year follow-up and 151 had all assessments. There were only few positive and weak correlations between performance tests and PROMS and between clinical measurements and PROMS (r = 0.00 – 0.38), and the majority were of negligible strength.
Conclusions There was no clinically important correlation between scores obtained by PROMs, functional performance tests and instrumented laxity of the knee at 1-year follow-up after ACLR, meaning that the various modalities represent different aspects of outcome, and that one type of outcome cannot represent all. Conclusions based on one type of outcome may not be sufficient.
