Abstract:Background: Restoring maximal muscle strength of the knee extensors (KE) and knee flexors (KF) following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury and ACL reconstruction is of great importance to reduce the re-injury rate after ACL reconstruction and to reduce the risk of knee osteoarthritis. Therefore, it is essential that clinicians and healthcare providers use valid and reliable measures to assess knee muscle strength to ensure a safe return to sport. Purpose: To evaluate the reliability (test-retest reliability, inter-tester reliability and test-retest agreement) and validity (concurrent validity, convergent validity and ForceFrame (FF) vs. isokinetic dynamometer (ID) agreement) of the ForceFrame (FF) dynamometer during isometric testing of the knee extensors and flexors. Study design: Cross-sectional study. Material and methods: Twenty-seven participants with ACL injury or reconstruction were recruited for participation in this study. maximal voluntary isometric contration (MVIC) of the knee extensors and flexors was tested on two separate days. Day one included validity assessments with FF, a gold-standard ID and a handheld dynamometer (HHD). Day two included reliability assessments with FF performed by two assessors. Main outcome measures were day-to-day test-retest reliability and agreement and inter-tester reliability of FF, and concurrent validity (FF vs. an ID and a HHD). Reliability was tested as test-retest and inter-tester reliability using interclass correlation coefficient (ICC), while agreement was tested using Bland & Altman plots with limits of agreement (LOA), standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC). Concurrent validity between FF, ID, and HHD was assessed using Pearson's correlations and mean difference was evaluated by Bland & Altman plots. Results: Twenty-seven participants (10 females, 17 males) with a median age of 25 years (range 19-60) were included in this study. There was a good day-to-day test-retest reliability for MVIC of KE (ICC=0.77, CI95:0.48-0.90) and KF (ICC=0.83, CI95:0.61-0.92) and excellent inter-tester reliability for MVIC of KE (ICC=0.97, CI95:0.94-0.98) and KF (ICC=0.93, 95CI:0.85-0.97). Standard error of measurement (SEM) was 8% and 9%, while the smallest detectable change (SDC) was 22% and 27% for KE and KF, respectively. FF showed fair concurrent validity compared to ID for KE (r=0.56), poor concurrent validity for knee flexors (KF (r=0.24) and compared to HHD a moderate correlation for KE (r=0.74) and poor correlation for KF (r=0.12). Bland & Altman plots between FF and the ID showed a mean difference of -0.51 Nm/kg for KE and -0.32Nm/kg for KF. Conclusions: FF can be used to obtain reliable and valid results to assess MVIC of the KE, but not the KF. It should be noted that absolute results produced by the FF may be considered an underestimation of actual MVIC. The test position to assess KF in FF does not appear to be optimal, and different test-positions may be considered. Level of evidence: Level 3.

Measurement properties for muscle strength tests following anterior cruciate ligament and/or meniscus injury: What tests to use and where do we need to go? A systematic review with meta-analyses for the OPTIKNEE consensus

Rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament and meniscal injuries: a best-evidence synthesis of systematic reviews for the OPTIKNEE consensus

Validity, Agreement and Reliability of the ForceFrame Dynamometer in Patients with Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury

No sign of weakness: a systematic review and meta-analysis of hip and calf muscle strength after anterior cruciate ligament injury

Tale of quadriceps and hamstring muscle strength after ACL reconstruction: a systematic review with longitudinal and multivariate meta-analysis

Knee muscle strength and steadiness for individuals with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and knee osteoarthritis

Neuromuscular Function of the Knee Joint Following Knee Injuries: Does It Ever Get Back to Normal? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses

MUSCLE STRENGTH EVALUATION AFTER ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION USING ISOKINETIC DYNAMOMETRY

A 6-Month Analysis of 504 Patients from the MERIScience Cohort

Meaningful thresholds for patient-reported outcomes following interventions for anterior cruciate ligament tear or traumatic meniscus injury: a systematic review for the OPTIKNEE consensus

Does Concomitant Meniscectomy or Meniscus Repair Affect Muscle Strength, Lower Extremity Balance, and Functional Tests after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction?

Is There a Strength Deficit of the Quadriceps Femoris Muscle in Patients Treated Conservatively or Surgically after Primary or Recurrent Patellar Dislocations? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Predicting the Recovery of Isokinetic Knee Strength 6 Months After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

The Validity and Responsiveness of Isometric Lower Body Multi-Joint Tests of Muscular Strength: a Systematic Review

Knee extensor muscle weakness is a risk factor for the development of knee osteoarthritis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis including 46 819 men and women

Restoring Knee Flexor Strength Symmetry Requires 2 Years After ACL Reconstruction, But Does It Matter for Second ACL Injuries? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Measurement Properties of Performance-Based Measures to Assess Physical Function in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

Effect of isokinetic muscle strength training on knee muscle strength, proprioception, and balance ability in athletes with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomised control trial

Absolute and Normalized Normative Torque Values of Knee Extensors and Flexors in Healthy Trained Subjects: Asymmetry Questions the Classical Use of Uninjured Limb as Reference

Changes in passive hamstring stiffness after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A prospective study with comparison of healthy controls

Does the one-leg rise test reflect quadriceps strength in individuals following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?