Bilateral Squatting Mechanics Are Associated With Landing Mechanics in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Patients

Abstract

Background:

Proper lower extremity biomechanics during bilateral landing is important for reducing injury risk in athletes returning to sports after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Although landing is a quick ballistic movement that is difficult to modify, squatting is a slower cyclic movement that is ideal for motor learning.

Hypothesis:

There is a relationship between lower extremity biomechanics during bilateral landing and bilateral squatting in patients with an ACLR.

Study Design:

Descriptive laboratory study.

Methods:

A total of 41 patients after a unilateral ACLR (24 men, 17 women; 5.9 ± 1.4 months after ACLR) completed 15 unweighted bilateral squats and 10 bilateral stop-jumps. Three-dimensional lower extremity kinematics and kinetics were collected, and peak knee abduction angle, knee abduction/adduction range of motion, peak vertical ground-reaction force limb symmetry index (LSI), vertical ground-reaction force impulse LSI, and peak knee extension moment LSI were computed during the descending phase of the squatting and landing tasks. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to compare each outcome between limbs, and Spearman correlations were used to compare outcomes between the squatting and landing tasks.

Results:

The peak vertical ground reaction force, the vertical ground reaction force impulse, and the peak knee extension moment were reduced in the surgical (Sx) limb relative to the nonsurgical (NSx) limb during both the squatting and landing tasks (P < .001). The relationship between squatting and landing tasks was strong for the peak knee abduction angle (R = 0.697-0.737; P < .001); moderate for the frontal plane knee range of motion (NSx: R = 0.366, P = .019; Sx: R = 0.418, P = 0.007), the peak knee extension moment LSI (R = 0.573; P < .001), the vertical ground reaction force impulse LSI (R = 0.382; P < .014); and weak for the peak vertical ground reaction force LSI (R = 0.323; P = .039).

Conclusion:

Patients who have undergone an ACLR continue to offload their surgical limb during both squatting and landing. Additionally, there is a relationship between movement deficits during squatting and movement deficits during landing in patients with an ACLR preparing to return to sports.

Clinical Relevance:

As movement deficits during squatting and landing were related before return to sports, this study suggests that interventional approaches to improve squatting biomechanics may translate to improved landing biomechanics in patients with an ACLR.