Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2026 Jan 28. doi: 10.1002/ksa.70311. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This scoping review aims to identify and synthesise the most frequently used outcome measures for physiotherapy after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) to support the selection of methods used in future randomised controlled trials.
METHODS: Literature search was performed on Embase, MEDLINE via PubMed and Web of Science databases in November 2024, with no time restrictions applied. A search update was subsequently conducted, covering studies published from November 2024 to October 2025. The search was limited to randomised controlled trials evaluating any type of physiotherapy intervention following ACLR, conducted at various postoperative time points. Outcome measures were grouped into patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), performance-based outcome measures (PBOMs) and impairment-based outcome measures. Their frequency was then determined and classified according to the time of measurement after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
RESULTS: Out of 4905 identified studies, 289 were included in the review, identifying 82 distinct outcome measures, none of which were used in more than 30% of the included studies. PROMs were used 380 times. The most commonly reported PROMs were the Lysholm knee scoring scale (25.3%), the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC Subjective Knee Form) (23.9%), the visual analogue scale (VAS) (21.8%), the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) (13.2%) and the tegner activity scale (12.5%). PBOMs were used 341 times across the included studies. The most frequently applied PBOMs were the isokinetic dynamometer under concentric conditions (29.1%), hop tests (19.0%) and the isometric dynamometer (18.7%). Impairment-based outcome measures were used 312 times and were the least frequently applied. The most common impairment-based outcome measures included goniometric assessment of range of motion (28.4%), arthrometric measurements (18.7%) and swelling assessment using a measuring tape (12.5%). The most frequently used PBOMs were the isokinetic dynamometer (concentric conditions), hop tests and the isometric dynamometer.
CONCLUSION: Results of a scoping review indicate significant heterogeneity in the outcome measures used to evaluate physical therapy interventions after ACLR. The lack of clear recommendations for reporting outcomes complicates comparisons between studies and limits the ability to synthesise evidence in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.
PMID:41603550 | DOI:10.1002/ksa.70311