Rehabilitation and Return to Sport After Hip Arthroscopy

Using Resistance-Band Tests to Evaluate Trunk Muscle Strength in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Test-Retest Reliability Study

Exercise is a front-line intervention to increase functional capacity and reduce pain and disability in people with low strength levels or disorders. However, there is a lack of validated field-based tests to check the initial status and, more importantly, to control the process and make tailored adjustments in load, intensity, and recovery. We aimed to determine the test-retest reliability of a submaximal, resistance-band test to evaluate the strength of the trunk stability muscles using a portable force sensor in middle-aged adults (48 ± 13 years) with medically diagnosed chronic low back pain and healthy peers (n = 35). Participants completed two submaximal progressive tests of two resistance-band exercises (unilateral row and Pallof press), consisting of 5 s maintained contraction, progressively increasing the load. The test stopped when deviation from the initial position by compensation movements occurred. Trunk muscle strength (CORE muscles) was monitored in real time using a portable force sensor (strain gauge). Results revealed that both tests were highly reliable (intra-class correlation [ICC] > 0.901) and presented low errors and coefficients of variation (CV) in both groups. In particular, people with low back pain had errors of 14-19 N (CV = 9-12%) in the unilateral row test and 13-19 N (CV = 8-12%) in the Pallof press. No discomfort or pain was reported during or after the tests. These two easy-to-use and technology-based tests result in a reliable and objective screening tool to evaluate the strength and trunk stability in middle-aged adults with chronic low back pain, considering an error of measurement < 20 N. This contribution may have an impact on improving the individualization and control of rehabilitation or physical training in people with lumbar injuries or disorders.

Postoperative weight-bearing restrictions and rehabilitation protocols after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review

Despite recent increased interest in hip arthroscopy for the management of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), there is little evidence to guide weight-bearing recommendations and rehabilitation postoperatively. The primary objective of this study was to determine if sufficient evidence exists to recommend specific weight-bearing restrictions postoperatively. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021247741). PubMed, MEDLINE and Embase were searched on 3 March 2023 for Level I-IV studies including patients over the age of 18 years, with a minimum 1-year follow-up and reporting of a weight-bearing status, a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) and a clinical outcome. Meta-analysis was precluded due to heterogeneity in the included studies, and a descriptive analysis was undertaken. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed with the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). Twenty-four studies including 2231 patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for treatment of FAI were included (follow-up interval 33.2 ± 24.7 months). Most articles (62.5%) were case series. There were seven terms describing weight-bearing recommendations, with 83% being some variation of 'partial weight-bearing'. Eight PROMs were reported, with 83% using the modified Harris Hip Score and 87.5% of studies reporting reoperation rates. Only 75% of studies reported rehabilitation protocols. The average MINORS score was 11.07 ± 1.10 out of 16 for non-comparative studies and 18.22 ± 1.48 out of 24 for comparative studies. The reporting of weight-bearing status, clinical outcomes, PROMs and rehabilitation parameters remains poor. At present, sufficient comparative evidence does not exist to make specific weight-bearing recommendation postoperatively.

Rehabilitation Protocol After Hip Arthroscopy: A 2015-2020 Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Although many rehabilitation protocols after hip arthroscopy have been described, there is still significant variability about duration, goals, restrictions, and techniques to apply by the physical therapy after the surgical procedure. The aim of the study was to systematically review rehabilitation after hip arthroscopy.

DESIGN

The data sources were PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were used for the systematic review. Level I-IV evidence clinical studies and clinical reviews that focused on rehabilitation protocols after hip arthroscopy have been used as study eligibility criteria. Major limitations include the retrospective nature of most of the studies selected (level IV evidence) and the use of different clinical scores to report the outcomes.

RESULTS

This review showed that although a standardized guideline on rehabilitation after hip arthroscopy is still missing, the most recent studies and clinical trials are focusing on a four-phase program, which includes goals, recommendations, and a progression of exercises.

CONCLUSIONS

Rehabilitation after hip arthroscopy is strongly suggested, but different authors recommended different rehabilitation programs. There is not a defined program, but as of today, the current standard of care is composed of phase-based programs.

Structured physical therapy protocols following hip arthroscopy and their effect on patient-reported outcomes-a systematic review of the literature

 

The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of structured physical therapy protocols on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following hip arthroscopy. A literature search was completed in October 2019 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines to identify articles reporting specific rehabilitation protocols following hip arthroscopy that document PROs. Studies meeting all inclusion and exclusion were reviewed and data were extracted. Six studies were included in analysis. The mean age was 34.7% and 56.6% were males. Five studies described rehabilitation protocols in phases with specific goals and progression criteria. All studies included range of motion (ROM) and weight-bearing (WB) precautions. Return to sport (RTS)/activity varied between 7 and 32 weeks. The studies used variations of 21 different PROs. Significant improvements in baseline and post-operative PROs noted across studies. Rehabilitation protocols following hip arthroscopy typically consist of 4–5 phase programs with set goals and progression criteria. Several commonalities existed between studies on WB, ROM precautions and gait normalization. However, timing and recommendations for RTS/return to work varied between studies and were dependent on the concomitant procedures performed as well as type of patient population. Clinically significant improvement in PROs from baseline noted in majority of the studies reviewed that involved a structured rehabilitation program following arthroscopic management of femoroacetabular impingement. As there is heterogeneity in patient-specific characteristics across the included studies, no determination can be made as to which protocol is most effective and further high-quality comparative studies are needed.

Clinical relevance

Adopting phase-based rehabilitation protocols following arthroscopic femoroacetabular impingement treatment help achieve improved outcomes that are predictable