I had the pleasure of listening to Darin Padua, PhD, of UNC present some of his latest research on ACL injury prevention last week. He has been doing research for some time. One of his studies (JUMP ACL) in collaboration with the military and several others has looked at prospective data and injury occurrence among college age subjects.

Much of the research to date on injury prevention has been done by Timothy Hewett and his colleagues. It has concluded that drop landing with a valgus collapse (hip abduction/IR with valgus knee moment) is a risk factor for injury. Interstingly enough, despite that knowledge and the proliferation of prevention programs, Darin mentioned that overall these prevention programs have not slowed the rate of ACL tears in the last decade. Why is that?  He also relayed that much of what we know now is based on 15 total cases.

The Jump ACL Study in a nutshell lasted for 5 years at 3 different military academies:

N = 5,700 cadets with no prior ACL surgery

  • Soccer players = 1,690
  • Tested from 2005 to 2008
  • 39% female; 25% NCAA athletes
  • 14,653 person-years of follow-up

N = 113 incident ACL injuries

  • Soccer players = 29
  • Mean time from testing to injury = 3.1 yrs
  • N = 92 one ACL injury; N = 11 two ACL injuries

Some data (will be published) he discussed based on his findings revealed the following about high risk profiles for ACL injury:

  • Hip flexion > 40 degrees at landing = 1.76x increased risk
  • Hip adduction plus knee valgus = 3x increased risk
  • Hip adduction plus knee varus = 27x increased risk

He also mentioned that the high risk profile does not correspond to the ACL injury event profile of:

  • Hip abduction
  • Lateral trunk flexion
  • Knee valgus collapse
  • Small knee flexion
  • Tibial ER/IR

In the end, he suggests we need to better understand who to target (high risk profile clients) and what to modify (injury event profile) so we can better customize injury prevention programs that optimize proper movement and meet the needs of each individual athlete.  He reminded us that using the uninjured side for comparison is insufficient as faulty movement patterns already likely existed contributing to the first ACL injury.

So, assessing movement continuously and striving for excellent movement quality is a MUST if we are going to both prevent initial ACL injuries and reduce the re-tear rates for our athletes we send back to play.  He reports that those at increased risk simply have bad biomechanics.  His message provides more weight to having an advanced algorithm to identify asymmetry, poor motor control and flawed movement patterns in order to effectively prescribe interventions to address these things.

At UNC they use a PRIME assessment.  I am excited to learn more about it and have referred one of my female higher level soccer players to their lab for assessment as I look at this return to play decision with her now that she is just past 7 months post-op.   I think the hip/core obviously play an important role as I see so much deficiency in my female patients recovering from injury.

Clearly his findings with hip adduction and varus as a big risk factor seem to indicate it could be a top down kinetic chain breakdown as well upon impact based on the risk profile.  Pelvic stability or the lack thereof seems to be significant, only NOT in the same manner we thought about it before based on previous research available.  Stay tuned, as we have lots more to learn about ACL injuries and how best to tailor our prevention efforts.