preprints.org > medicine & pharmacology > sport sciences & therapy > doi: 10.20944/preprints202303.0308.v1

Preprint Article Version 1 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

Version 1 : Received: 10 March 2023 / Approved: 16 March 2023 / Online: 16 March 2023 (13:59:56 CET)

Variable during practice is widely accepted to be advantageous for motor learning and therefor a valuable strategy to effectively reduce high-risk landing mechanics and prevent primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Few attempts have examined the specific effects of variable train-ing in athletes who have undergone ACL reconstruction. Thereby it is still unclear to what extent the variations in different sensor areas lead to different effects. Accordingly, we compared the effects of versatile movement variations (DL) with variations of movements with emphasis on disrupting visual information (VMT) in athletes who had undergone ACL reconstruction. For-ty-five interceptive sports athletes after ACL reconstruction were randomly allocated to a DL group (n= 15), VT group (n= 15) or control group (n= 15). The primary outcome was functional performance (Triple Hop Test). The secondary outcomes included dynamic balance (Star Excur-sion Balance Test (SEBT)), biomechanics during single-leg drop-landing task hip flexion (HF), knee flexion (KF), ankle dorsiflexion (AD), knee valgus (KV), and vertical ground reaction force (VGRF), and kinesiophobia (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK)) assessed before and after the 8-weeks of interventions. Data were analyzed be means of 3×2 repeated measures ANOVA fol-lowed by post hoc comparison (Bonferroni) at the significance level of p≤0.05. Significant group × time interaction effects, main effect of time and main effect of group were found for triple hop test, all eight directions of SEBT, HF, KF, AD, KV, VGRF and TSK. There was no significant main ef-fect of group in HF and triple hop test. Also, significant differences in triple hop test, seven direc-tions of SEBT, HF, KF, KV, VGRF and TSK were found between control group with the DL and VMT groups. Between group differences in AD and medial direction of SEBT were not signifi-cant. Also, there was no significant differences between VMT and control groups in triple hop test and HF variables. Both motor learning (DL and VMT) programs improved outcomes in patients after ACL reconstruction. Findings suggest that DL and VMT training programs lead to compa-rable improvements in rehabilitation.

Anterior Crucial ligament; Rehabilitation; differential learning; Visual-motor therapy

MEDICINE & PHARMACOLOGY, Sport Sciences & Therapy