Jumping into recovery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of discriminatory and responsive force plate parameters in individuals following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction during countermovement and drop jumps

Abstract

Abstract Purpose Comprehensive understanding of force plate parameters distinguishing individuals postprimary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) from healthy controls during countermovement jumps (CMJ) and/or drop jumps (DJ) is lacking. This review addresses this gap by identifying discriminative force plate parameters and examining changes over time in individuals post‐ACLR during CMJ and/or DJ. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta analyses following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Nine databases were searched from inception to March 2022. We included cross‐sectional papers comparing post‐ACLR with healthy controls or longitudinal studies of individuals at least 6 months postprimary ACLR while performing CMJ and/or DJ on force plates. The methodological quality was appraised using the Modified Downs and Black Checklist. Results Thirty‐three studies including 1185 (50.38%) participants post‐ACLR, and 1167 (49.62%) healthy controls, were included. Data were categorised into single‐leg CMJ, double‐leg CMJ, single‐leg DJ, and double‐leg DJ. Jump height was reduced in both single (mean difference [MD] = −3.13; p < 0.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: [−4.12, −2.15]) and double‐leg (MD = −4.24; p < 0.01; 95% CI: [−5.14, −3.34]) CMJs amongst individuals with ACLR. Similarly, concentric impulse and eccentric/concentric impulse asymmetry could distinguish between ACLR (MD = 3.42; p < 0.01; 95% CI: [2.19, 4.64]) and non‐ACLR (MD = 5.82; p < 0.01; 95% CI: [4.80, 6.80]) individuals. In double‐leg DJs, peak vertical ground reaction forces were lower in the involved side (MD = −0.10; p = 0.03; 95% CI: [−0.18, −0.01]) but higher in the uninvolved side (MD = 0.15; p < 0.01; 95% CI: [0.10, 0.20]) when compared to controls and demonstrated significant changes between 6 months and 3 years post‐ACLR. Conclusion This study identified discriminative kinetic parameters when comparing individuals with and without ACLR and also monitored neuromuscular function post‐ACLR. Due to heterogeneity, a combination of parameters may be required to better identify functional deficits post‐ACLR. Level of Evidence Level III.

Keywords

• ACLR
• anterior cruciate ligament
• anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
• countermovement jump
• drop jump
• force plate