Skip to content

Accelerated vs Non-Accelerated Rehabilitation After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Pilot Study

Accelerated vs Non-Accelerated Rehabilitation After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Pilot Study

Status
Terminated
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03648944
Acronym
AVON ACL
Enrollment
7
Registered
2018-08-28
Start date
2014-12-31
Completion date
2016-09-19
Last updated
2018-08-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Keywords

Rehabilitation Outcome

Brief summary

This study is comparing accelerated versus nonaccelerated rehabilitation following ACL reconstruction. Patients undergoing ACL reconstruction will be randomly allocated to one of the two rehabillitation pathways. They will then be monitored over a 15 month period.

Detailed description

The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is a vital structure within the knee that provides the stability of the joint. Injury to the ACL is a common injury of the knee affecting young adults, usually whilst playing sport. Surgical reconstruction of complete ACL rupture aims to restore stability of the knee, reduce pain and swelling, limit future arthritic change, maximise knee function and allow patients to return to preinjury recreational and sporting activity. It has been suggested that the success of an ACL reconstruction is dependent upon the postoperative rehabilitation process. There is no consensus on the best rehabilitation following ACL reconstruction. Traditional, nonaccelerated, rehabilitation programmes emphasise protection of the ACL graft, modelled on the stages of graft healing. This includes postoperative immobilisation, limiting how much the knee can be straightened, restricted weight bearing and delayed return to activity with most patients returning to activity at 1 year. Complications have however been identified with nonaccelerated rehabilitation. This includes ongoing muscle weakness, inability to fully straighten the knee, and knee cap pain at 1 year followup. To address these issues alternative, accelerated, rehabilitation programmes have been developed. These have included allowing full movement, earlier weight bearing and earlier return to activity, with no adverse sequalae. The uncertainty in the benefit of accelerated rehabilitation over conventional nonaccelerated protocols warrants further investigation in order determine whether accelerated protocols improve knee muscle function and clinical outcome in the longterm, and provide a more effective practice for treating patients following ACL reconstruction, or whether they pose an increased risk of reinjury by permitting early return to higher level activity. This study is a single centre randomized controlled trial comparing accelerated versus nonaccelerated rehabilitation protocols with the use of clinical and patient reported outcome measures over a 15month period following ACL reconstruction.

Interventions

OTHERAccelerated Rehabillitation
OTHERNon-Accelerated Rehabillitation

Sponsors

North Bristol NHS Trust
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
16 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Male or female patients aged 16 years or over, listed for primary ACL reconstruction using hamstring grafts at North Bristol NHS Trust.

Exclusion criteria

* Patients listed for double bundle ACL reconstruction. * Patients listed for multiple ligament reconstruction. * Patients listed for revision reconstructive surgery of the knee. * Previous history of lower limb arthroplasty. * Previous history of knee injury in either knee, e.g. meniscal tears, previous ligament injuries. * Patients unable to understand or read English (the outcome measures being utilised have been validated or published in the English language only). * Patients unable to comply with the study protocol. * Patients unable to attend for rehabilitation at North Bristol NHS Trust. * Meniscal repairs resulting in subsequent modification to the rehabilitation protocol (e.g. altered weight bearing, brace).

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
IKDC data completion15 monthsAs a measure of the feasibility of the study design
KOOS data completion15 monthsAs a measure of the feasibility of the study design
Tegner data completion15 monthsAs a measure of the feasibility of the study design
EQ5D data completion15 monthsAs a measure of the feasibility of the study design
Anterior/Posterior knee translation completion15 monthsAs a measure of the feasibility of the study design
Lower Limb Symmetry completion15 monthsAs a measure of the feasibility of the study design

Countries

United Kingdom

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026