3.9 Article

STRENGTH of ATHLETES' HIP MUSCLES AFTER ACL RECONSTRUCTION

Journal

REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE MEDICINA DO ESPORTE
Volume 21, Issue 6, Pages 476-479

Publisher

SOC BRASILEIRA MED ESPORTE
DOI: 10.1590/1517-869220152106151257

Keywords

Evaluation; muscle strength; hip; knee injuries; anterior cruciate ligament

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Knee injuries are very common in sports, among which stands out the anterior cruciate ligament injury (ACL) by the frequency and severity. Objective: To analyze the concentric muscle strength of hip abduction and adduction in athletes after ACL reconstruction who finished their rehabilitation protocol and were allowed to return practicing sports. The secondary objective was to compare the isokinetic muscle strength of professional and non-professional athletes after rehabilitation of ACL reconstruction. Methods: Fifty-four athletes, with mean age 23.2 +/- 4.3 years were evaluated, divided into two groups: ACL Group (n= 27) operated from ACL injury and Control Group (n= 27) not operated. Isokinetic dynamometry was carried out of hip abductors and adductors at two different speeds, 30 and 60 degrees/second. Results: In the evaluation of muscle strength and power of hip abductors, the muscular activity in the operated side was higher at the speed of 60 degrees/second and lower at the speed of 30 degrees/second in comparison to the non-operated side. Conclusion: The strength of hip abductor muscles of athletes after ACL reconstruction who completed their rehabilitation protocol and who returned to sports showed higher torque values in the operated side at the speed of 60 degrees/second. At the speed of 30 degrees/second, there was a tendency of non-operated side showing greater strength. Deficiency in the isokinetic muscle strength was not identified in hip adductors muscles. Moreover, no difference has been identified between operated and non-operated members in subgroups professional athletes and non-professional athletes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available