Open versus Closed Kinetic Chain Exercises following an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Pub Date : 2017-01-01 Epub Date: 2017-08-17 DOI:10.1155/2017/4721548
Daniel Jewiss, Cecilia Ostman, Neil Smart
{"title":"Open versus Closed Kinetic Chain Exercises following an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Daniel Jewiss,&nbsp;Cecilia Ostman,&nbsp;Neil Smart","doi":"10.1155/2017/4721548","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is no consensus on whether closed kinetic chain (CKC) or open kinetic chain (OKC) exercises should be the intervention of choice following an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury or reconstruction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search identified randomized controlled trials of OKC versus CKC exercise training in people who had undergone ACL reconstructive surgery. All published studies in this systematic review were comparisons between OKC and CKC groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven studies were included. Lysholm knee scoring scale was not significantly different between OKC and CKC exercise patients: MD: -1.03%; CI: -13.02, 10.95; <i>p</i> value = 0.87 (Chi<sup>2</sup>  =  0.18, df = 1, and <i>p</i> value  =  0.67). Hughston clinic questionnaire scores were not significantly different between OKC and CKC exercise patients: MD: -1.29% (-12.02, 9.43); <i>p</i> value = 0.81 (Chi<sup>2</sup>  =  0.01, df = 1, and <i>p</i> value = 0.93).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While OKC and CKC may be beneficial during ACL surgical rehabilitation, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that either one is superior to the other.</p>","PeriodicalId":73953,"journal":{"name":"","volume":"2017 ","pages":"4721548"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2017/4721548","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/4721548","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/8/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

Background: There is no consensus on whether closed kinetic chain (CKC) or open kinetic chain (OKC) exercises should be the intervention of choice following an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury or reconstruction.

Methods: A systematic search identified randomized controlled trials of OKC versus CKC exercise training in people who had undergone ACL reconstructive surgery. All published studies in this systematic review were comparisons between OKC and CKC groups.

Results: Seven studies were included. Lysholm knee scoring scale was not significantly different between OKC and CKC exercise patients: MD: -1.03%; CI: -13.02, 10.95; p value = 0.87 (Chi2  =  0.18, df = 1, and p value  =  0.67). Hughston clinic questionnaire scores were not significantly different between OKC and CKC exercise patients: MD: -1.29% (-12.02, 9.43); p value = 0.81 (Chi2  =  0.01, df = 1, and p value = 0.93).

Conclusions: While OKC and CKC may be beneficial during ACL surgical rehabilitation, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that either one is superior to the other.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
前交叉韧带重建后开放与封闭运动链训练:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:对于前交叉韧带(ACL)损伤或重建后是否应选择闭合动力链(CKC)或开放动力链(OKC)训练,目前尚无共识。方法:一项系统搜索确定了在接受ACL重建手术的患者中进行OKC与CKC运动训练的随机对照试验。本系统综述中所有发表的研究都是OKC组和CKC组之间的比较。结果:纳入7项研究。Lysholm膝关节评分量表在OKC和CKC运动患者之间无显著差异:MD: -1.03%;Ci: -13.02, 10.95;p值= 0.87 (Chi2 = 0.18, df = 1, p值= 0.67)。休斯顿临床问卷得分在OKC和CKC运动患者之间无显著差异:MD: -1.29% (-12.02, 9.43);p值= 0.81 (Chi2 = 0.01, df = 1, p值= 0.93)。结论:虽然OKC和CKC在ACL手术康复中可能是有益的,但没有足够的证据表明其中任何一个优于另一个。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1