
==== Front
Int J Sports Phys Ther
Int J Sports Phys Ther
2159
International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy
2159-2896
NASMI Website: International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy

38835982
117400
10.26603/001c.117400
Original Research
Postural Control During Single-Leg Landing in Female Athletes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
Ogura Ayane 1
Miyazaki Terumitsu 2
Ida Hirofumi 3
Shibata Satoshi 4
Takemura Masahiro 5
1 Graduate School of Comprehensive Human Sciences University of Tsukuba https://ror.org/02956yf07
2 National Institute of Fitness and Sports in Kanoya https://ror.org/04n6qtb21
3 Human Science Center Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences https://ror.org/04vgkzj18
4 Physical Therapy Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences https://ror.org/04vgkzj18
5 Faculty of Health and Sport Sciences University of Tsukuba https://ror.org/02956yf07
Corresponding author: Masahiro Takemura Faculty of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Tsukuba 1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8577, Japan
1 6 2024
2024
19 6 681691
30 10 2023
9 4 2024
© The Author(s)
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (4.0) which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Background

Secondary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is a complication of ACL reconstruction (ACLR), which may result from altered neuromuscular control affecting anticipatory postural adjustments (APAs) and compensatory postural adjustments (CPAs) required for maintaining balance during movement. However, it remains unclear how APAs and CPAs differ in single-leg landings post-ACLR compared to healthy subjects.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to clarify the differences in muscle activities of APAs and CPAs, lower limb kinematics, and kinetics between athletes with a history of ACLR and healthy athletes during single-leg landing.

Study design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

Eighteen female athletes were recruited and divided into ACLR (n = 9) and control groups (n = 9). The experimental task involved a single-leg landing from a 30 cm box. Joint angles and moments were determined using a 3-dimensional motion analysis system, while muscle activity was assessed using surface electromyography. Analysis intervals were divided into two phases: the APA phase (-150 ms to 50 ms) and the CPA phase (50 ms to 250 ms), with initial contact (0 ms) as the reference point. Muscle activity onset time was defined as the time when the baseline exceeded by the sum of mean values and 2 standard deviations.

Results

No significant differences were observed in muscle activity or onset time between the ACLR and control groups. However, an increased hip external rotation moment was observed during the CPA phase in the ACLR group.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that APAs and CPAs of athletes who returned to sports more than 1 year post-ACLR may be similar. The increased hip external rotation moment in the ACLR group during the CPA phase could represent a specific compensatory strategy to decrease the hip internal rotation angle post-ACLR.

Level of Evidence

III

anterior cruciate knee ligament reconstruction
female athletes
==== Body
pmcINTRODUCTION

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries frequently occur in female athletes,1 and many undergo ACL reconstruction (ACLR) to return to sport (RTS).2 It has been reported that the incidence of a second ACL injury in the ACLR group was 0.47 per 1000 athlete exposures (AEs), which is about twice as high as the incidence of the initial ACL injury at 0.24 per 1000 AEs.3 Since secondary ACL injury is more common in females than in males,3 there is a relatively high need to investigate female athletes.

Seventy percent of ACL injuries occur via non-contact mechanisms4 and are caused by large ground reaction forces acting on the landing leg during rapid deceleration movements such as single-leg landing.5 These may not only result from the initial ACL injury, but also the risk of injury may be greater after ACLR. This is due to alterations in movement patterns, such as joint angles, joint moments, and coordination movements during single-leg landing and hopping post-ACLR, resulting from deficits in neuromuscular control.6,7 Afferent mechanosensory feedback control from the knee joint after initial contact (IC), which occurs to stabilize the joint during landing movements, takes more than 100 ms.8,9 However, ACL injury occurs 40 ms after IC,10 which renders feedback control too late to prevent ACL injury. Therefore, the timing of ACL injury may occur before feedback occurs. Consequently, assessing neuromuscular control before and after the onset of sensory input during single-leg landing movements can elucidate the ongoing neuromuscular activity strategies when an ACL injury is expected to occur.

In a previous study of biomechanics during drop-landing after ACLR, asymmetry of sagittal plane knee extension moment, knee valgus angle, and hip internal rotation moment were identified as risk factors for secondary ACL injury.11 Additionally, knee valgus angle enhances hip rotation moment and knee extension moment asymmetry, and deficits in single-leg balance are associated with the risk of reinjury. Knee abduction moment, internal tibial rotation moment, and anterior tibial shear force12 under axial impact produced clinically relevant ACL injuries.13 In summary, it has been pointed out that biomechanics during landing are an important factor in secondary ACL injury prevention after ACLR, but the changes in neuromuscular activity associated with movement patterns during landing are not clear. Therefore, it is necessary to examine these factors together to identify strategies for preventing secondary ACL injuries after ACLR.

The ability to minimize postural disturbances plays a crucial role in preventing injuries during sports activities.14 These efforts are achieved through compensatory and anticipatory strategies aimed at minimizing both unpredictable and predictable perturbations.8,15 Anticipatory postural adjustments (APAs) and compensatory postural adjustments (CPAs) come into play to maintain postural stability. APAs involve the activation or inhibition of lower limb muscles before internal or external balance perturbation occurs.16 Their primary role is to mitigate the impact of postural perturbation for maintaining balance.17 Conversely, CPAs are typically triggered by sensory feedback signals evoked by perturbation.9,18 Consequently, there is continuous muscle activity from the anticipatory to the compensatory phase during the movement.19 Therefore, it remains unclear during which phase of the landing ACL injury occurs in ACLR. By measuring APAs and CPAs before and after IC, it may be possible to clarify the mechanism of sensorimotor coordination during a risky landing motion. Also, it is possible that post-ACLR athletes’ neuromuscular control is affected by training during rehabilitation to return to sport.20 Hence, APAs and CPAs post-ACLR may exhibit distinct features compared to those observed in healthy subjects. However, the discrepancies between APAs and CPAs in female athletes with and without a history of ACLR have not yet been verified.

The purpose of this study was to clarify the differences in muscle activities of APAs and CPAs, lower limb kinematics, and kinetics between athletes with a history of ACLR and healthy athletes during single-leg landing. The hypotheses of this study were as follows: 1) muscle activity onset is delayed in the ACLR group compared to the control group; 2) muscle onset time was the same, but quadriceps activity during the compensatory phase was higher; and 3) hip adduction, internal rotation, and knee abduction angle at landing, along with hip adduction moment and knee abduction moment are reported to be higher in the ACLR group.21

METHODS

Participants

This cross-sectional study included nine female college athletes with a history of ACLR (ACLR group) and nine healthy subjects without a history of ACLR (CON group), selected from female athletes affiliated with university athletic clubs. ﻿The inclusion criteria for the ACLR group were as follows: 1) being 12 months post-surgery and having returned to full sports participation, 2) graft types being autograft (e.g., bone-patellar tendon-bone or hamstring tendon), 3) participation in sports activities such as cutting, pivoting, and jump-landing sports (handball, basketball, soccer, tennis, or lacrosse) prior to the injury, 4) ﻿no history of meniscal injury or surgery on either the ipsilateral or contralateral knee before ACL injury, and 5) absence of any disorders in the peripheral sensory system or history of surgery on the lumbar spine or lower limbs. The inclusion criteria for the CON group were: 1) no lower limb injuries and/or concussions within the prior three months and 2) no disorders in the peripheral sensory system or history of surgery on the lumbar spine or lower limbs.

The authors obtained written informed consent from all volunteers before their participation, following approval by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Health and Sports Sciences at the University (approval number 020-166).

Experimental task

The experimental task involved a single-leg landing from a 30 cm box, with participants instructed to land on the center of the force platform placed in front of the box. Additionally,

participants were instructed to place their hands on their waists to minimize the effect of balance retention by their upper limbs. For the single-leg landing motion, the injured leg was used in the ACLR group, while the dominant leg was used in the CON group. ﻿The dominant leg was defined as the leg preferred for kicking the ball by the participants. Throughout the experiment, participants were barefoot to eliminate the influence of footwear. Each participant was allowed to participate in several practice trials, and measurements continued until three successful trials were completed. Failed trials were characterized by foot slip after landing, loss of balance (where the sole of the opposite foot touched the floor or force plate), or inability to maintain the correct arm position.

Data collection

Surface electromyography (EMG) data were recorded at 1,000 Hz using a Data-LITE wireless EMG sensor ﻿(Biometrics Ltd.) and collected synchronously with the motion and force platform data. The skin at each electrode site was shaved and cleaned using an alcohol swab. Ultrasonography (Venue 50; GE Healthcare Japan) was used to define the anatomical properties of the superficial region of individual muscles for electrode placement, following the SENIAM recommendations.22 Electromyographic (EMG) activities of﻿﻿ the tibialis anterior (TA), medial head of the gastrocnemius (MG), rectus femoris (RF), biceps femoris (BF), ﻿semitendinosus (ST),﻿﻿ gluteus medius (GM), and adductor longus (AL) were measured. Electrodes were placed as follows: TA, 1/3 on the line between the tip of the fibula and the tip of the medial malleolus; MG, at the most prominent bulge of the muscle; RF, at 50% on the line from the anterior superior iliac spine to the superior part of the patella; BF, approximately halfway between the tibial lateral epicondyle and the ischial tuberosity over the muscle belly; ST, at 50% on the line between the ischial tuberosity and the medial epicondyle of the tibia; GM, ﻿50% on the line from the iliac crest to the trochanter; and AL, between the sartorius and gracilis muscles.

A three-dimensional motion analysis system (VICON MX, Oxford, UK) captured task motions at a 250 Hz sampling rate using 13 infrared cameras. Thirty-five retroreflective markers were placed on the anatomical landmarks across each participant’s body according to the standard Plug-in Gait model (Genetic Hays marker set).23,24

﻿Ground reaction force (GRF) data were measured using a force platform (Kistler Instruments, Inc., model 9281C, Winterthur, Switzerland). EMG and kinematic data were time-synchronized and acquired at 1,000 Hz. The GRF of the eight components (Fx, Fy, Fz, Mx, My, Mz, Cx, and Cy) were calculated for one force plate.

Data analysis

The following parameters were analyzed: (1) ﻿integrated electromyographic (IEMG) data, (2) muscle activity onset at the IC, (3) hip and knee joint angles, and (4) hip and knee joint moments. The analysis interval ranged from 150 ms before landing to 250 ms after landing, divided into the APA and CPA phases. Given previous studies suggesting that ACL injury may occur up to 100ms after IC, the analysis range was assumed to be no more than 100 ms after IC. IEMG was calculated for 4 different epochs, each lasting 100 ms in relation to T0 ﻿(defined as the instant when vertical ground reaction force exceeded 10N).25 APAs accounted for the electromechanical delay between muscle activity onset and torque generation, including the interval from T0 to 50 ms.26 The time windows for the four epochs were as follows: ﻿1) from -150 to -50 ms (anticipatory activity, APA1); 2) -50 to +50 ms (anticipatory activity, APA2); 3) +50 to +150 ms (compensatory reactions, CPA1); and 4) + 150 to +250 ms (compensatory reactions, CPA2).

Anticipatory EMG activity was calculated as follows: ∫−50−150EMG (APA1) represents the integral of EMG activity of the muscles from -150 to -50 ms with respect to t0, and similarly, ∫−5050EMG (APA2) is the integral of EMG activity, defined as the integral of the EMG signal from -50 to +50 ms with respect to t0. ﻿Compensatory EMG activity was calculated as follows: ∫15050EMG (CPA1) represents the integral of the EMG activity of the muscles from +50 to +150 ms with respect to t0, while ∫250150EMG (CPA2) was the integral of the EMG activity of the muscles from +150 to +250 ms with respect to t0.16

Data were analyzed offline using MATLAB (MathWorks Inc., USA). ﻿All EMG signals were rectified and filtered using a low-pass second-order Butterworth filter with a cutoff frequency of 20 Hz. For maximum voluntary contraction, IEMG data were calculated, and a 3 s IEMG was used to normalize the dynamic contraction recorded during landing (%MVC). Muscle activity onset was detected from the stance phase before landing for the baseline signal and 100 ms before approximately 300 ms from IC. Onset time was defined as the time when the EMG amplitude of the baseline signal exceeded the mean + 2SD for 12 ms.

Raw kinematic and kinetic data were filtered on the basis of frequency-content analysis of digitized coordinate data. GRF and marker trajectories were filtered at 15 Hz using a fourth-order Butterworth filter with VICON Nexus 2.0 software (Oxford Metrics Ltd., UK), consistent with previous studies.27 For all kinematic and kinetic data, the mean value of each 100 ms epoch was calculated. Joint angles and moments were averaged for each epoch, with time windows for the four epochs calculated at the same intervals as those for integral EMG.

Joint moments were computed on the reference leg side via a complete inverse-dynamic model implemented using the VICON Plug-in Gait. These moments were reported as external torques. Calculated GRF and joint moments were standardized according to the subject’s body mass (Nm/kg).

Statistical Analysis

To assess the normal distribution of the data, the Shapiro-Wilk tests were conducted prior to analysis. Independent-sample t-tests were used to ascertain significant differences in the onset time of muscle activity between participants in the ACLR and CON groups. ﻿For assessing significant interactions of each phase and participants in IEMG, hip, and knee joint angle, and moment, a two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was utilized, followed by post hoc tests. Post-hoc Bonferroni multiple comparison procedures were used. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 27 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA), with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. Additionally, a post-hoc power analysis was performed using G*Power software31(Version 3.1.9.6, University of Dusseldorf, Dusseldorf, DEU).28 The post-hoc power analysis, considering the significant result and the hip external rotation moment (effect size: 0.68), showed a power of 0.49 for both, calculated at an alpha level of 0.05.　

RESULTS

Descriptive characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 1.

227049 Table 1. Participant characteristics

　	ACLR group (n = 9)	CON group (n = 9)	p-value	
　	Mean ± SD	Mean ± SD	　	
Age (years)	20.8±1.4	20.4±1.2	0.599	
Body height (mm)	1624.7±52.5	1646.2±76.7	0.497	
Body weight (kg）	57.5±5.9	57.8±6.3	0.922	
Q-angle (°)	2.78±0.972	2.11±3.1	0.547	
Thigh-foot angle (°)	9.56±3.504	8.67±5.6	0.691	
Navicular drop test (cm)	4.11±3.06	4.22±2.8	0.937	
General joint laxity	1.6±0.9	1.1±1.1	0.303	
Leg heel angle (°)	3.0±1.4	4.1±1.2	0.088	
ACLR, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. CON, control

The onset times of muscle activity are depicted in Figure 1 ﻿﻿for all participants, as well as specifically for the ACLR and CON groups. No significant differences were observed in the onset time of muscle activity (p > .05).

227050 Figure 1. Muscle activity onset

ACLR, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. CON, control. TA, tibialis anterior. MG, medial head of the gastrocnemius. RF, rectus femoris. BF, biceps femoris. ST, semitendinosus. GM, gluteus medius. AL, adductor longus

The IEMG results for each muscle in the ACLR and CON groups are presented in Table 2. Comparisons of the IEMG in each phase between ACLR and control groups revealed no interaction between groups (p>0.05) but significant main effects for the IEMG in each phase.

Multiple comparisons showed significantly higher values for CPA1 and 2 compared to APA1, and for CPA1 compared to APA2 in the TA (p < 0.05). In the MG, APA1 and 2 were significantly higher than CPA1 and 2 (p <0.05); in RF, CPA1 was significantly higher than APA1, and APA2 was significantly higher than CPA2 (p <.05); in the BF, APA1 and 2 and CPA1 were significantly higher than CPA2 (p <0.05); in ST, APA2 and CPA1 were significantly higher than APA1 (p <.05). In the GM, APA2 was significantly higher than APA1, CPA1and 2, (p <0.05). Also, in AL, APA2 and CPA1 were significantly higher than APA1 (p <0.05).

227051 Table2. IEMG

Phase; Time (ms)	　	APA1; -150 ~ -50	APA2; -50 ~ 50	CPA1; 50 ~ 150	CPA2; 150 ~ 250	
　	　	(CI)	(95%CI)	(95%CI)	(95%CI)	
TA	ACLR	39.3 (26.9 – 51.7)	62.7 (52.1 – 73.2)	86.6 (71.3 – 102)	83.8 (67 – 100.6)	
(%MVC)	CON	39.3 (26.9 – 51.7)	62.7 (52.1 – 73.2)	86.6 (71.3 – 102)	83.8 (67 – 100.6)	
MG	ACLR	84.6 (59.1 – 110.1)	72.3 (55.1 – 89.5)	41.2 (25.2 – 57.1)	26.7 (17.2 – 36.3)	
　	CON	95.5 (75.7 – 115.4)	85.3 (71.6 – 99)	46.6 (38 – 55.1)	33.1 (22.9 – 43.2)	
RF	ACLR	61.2 (26.6 – 95.7)	118.3 (62.3 – 174.2)	96.6 (51.9 – 141.4)	63.7 (36 – 91.3)	
　	CON	74.5 (35.3 – 113.8)	139.8 (54.9 – 224.7)	111 (73.7 – 148.4)	73.6 (45.6 – 101.6)	
BF	ACLR	56.7 (33.9 – 79.6)	51.1 (37.3 – 64.9)	45.3 (33.2 – 57.3)	36.2 (26.1 – 46.4)	
　	CON	60 (31.4 – 88.6)	57 (36.4 – 77.6)	48.1 (31.8 – 64.3)	32 (20 – 44)	
ST	ACLR	30.9 (17.3 – 44.5)	43 (25.1 – 60.9)	41.7 (27 – 56.5)	27.7 (18.4 – 37.1)	
　	CON	28.7 (17.4 – 40)	36.9 (23.2 – 50.6)	48.2 (33.7 – 62.6)	36.4 (22.7 – 50)	
GM	ACLR	56.2 (35.2 – 77.3)	74.7 (55.9 – 93.5)	51.9 (41.4 – 62.5)	36.4 (27.4 – 45.5)	
　	CON	43.4 (28.9 – 57.8)	60.6 (47.1 – 74)	55 (44.5 – 65.5)	39.1 (29.5 – 48.7)	
AL	ACLR	24.9 (14.4 – 35.4)	46.1 (29.4 – 62.9)	54.3 (30.7 – 78)	44.8 (24.2 – 65.5)	
　	CON	22.4 (14.2 – 30.6)	38 (27.8 – 48.1)	48 (31.1 – 65)	34.5 (19.5 – 49.5)	
Mean ± SD

ACLR, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. CON, control. TA, tibialis anterior. MG, medial head of the gastrocnemius. RF, rectus femoris. BF, biceps femoris. ST, semitendinosus. GM, gluteus medius. AL, adductor longus. APA, Anticipatory postural adjustments. CPA, compensatory postural adjustments.

Comparison of hip and knee joint angles in each phase between ACLR and control groups showed no interaction but significant main effects for the joint angles in each phase (Table 3). Multiple comparisons revealed that the hip flexion angle was significantly higher in the following order: CPA2, CPA1, APA1, and APA2, (p <0.05). The angles of adduction and abduction were significantly greater in the CPA1 and 2 compared to APA1 and 2 (p <0.05). Similarly, the angles of internal and external rotation were significantly higher in CPA2 than in APA1, and in CPA1 and 2 compared to APA2 (p <0.05). The flexion angle of the knee joint increased significantly in the following order: CPA2 > CPA1 > APA1 > APA2 (p <0.05). Additionally, the angles of adduction and abduction were significantly higher in CPA1 than in APA1 and significantly higher in CPA2, CPA1, and APA2 (p <0.05). The internal and external rotation angles were significantly greater in CPA1 and 2 than in APA1 and 2 (p <0.05).

227052 Table 3. Hip and knee joint angles

Phase; Time (ms)	　	　	APA1; -150 ~ -50	APA2; -50 ~ 50	CPA1; 50 ~ 150	CPA2; 150 ~ 250	
　	　	　	(95%CI)	(95%CI)	(95%CI)	(95%CI)	
Hip Angle
(°)	Flexion+/	ACLR	34.3 (29 – 39.6)	30.7 (26 – 35.5)	48 (43.2 – 52.9)	56.2 (50.4 – 61.9)	
	Extension-	CON	31.3 (27.1 – 35.6)	25.7 (21.2 – 30.3)	41.2 (35.7 – 46.7)	48.4 (41.7 – 55.1)	
	Adduction+/	ACLR	-2.5 (-5.3 – 0.2)	-5.9 (-9.1 – -2.7)	3.3 (-0.7 – 7.2)	7.9 (4 – 11.9)	
	Abduction-	CON	-1.5 (-3.8 – 0.7)	-5.5 (-7.4 – -3.6)	4.6 (0.8 – 8.3)	9.4 (6.3 – 12.4)	
	Internal rotation+/	ACLR	-2.6 (-12.9 – 7.7)	-3.5 (-14.1 – 7)	-0.7 (-12.9 – 11.5)	-0.1 (-13.8 – 13.7)	
　	External rotation-	CON	4.6 (1.9 – 7.3)	4.2 (2.2 – 6.3)	8.9 (5.7 – 12.1)	10.7 (6.9 – 14.4)	
Knee Angle
(°)	Flexion+/	ACLR	29.2 (24 – 34.4)	21.9 (19.5 – 24.3)	58 (56 – 59.9)	66.2 (63.9 – 68.5)	
	Extension-	CON	33.8 (29.1 – 38.4)	23 (20.3 – 25.7)	57.5 (54.1 – 60.9)	65.7 (59.6 – 71.7)	
	Adduction+/	ACLR	5.1 (1.9 – 8.2)	3.6 (1.1 – 6.1)	7.9 (1.6 – 14.3)	8.5 (0.9 – 16)	
	Abduction-	CON	4.6 (1.8 – 7.4)	3.2 (0.8 – 5.5)	9.3 (3.9 – 14.6)	10.4 (4.2 – 16.5)	
	Internal rotation+/	ACLR	4.5 (1.1 – 7.9)	6.7 (3 – 10.3)	17.7 (15.1 – 20.3)	17.7 (15.5 – 20)	
　	External rotation-	CON	5.3 (2.1 – 8.5)	5.2 (2.7 – 7.6)	17.5 (14.1 – 21)	17 (12.5 – 21.6)	
Mean ± SD

ACLR, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. CON, control. APA, Anticipatory postural adjustments. CPA, compensatory postural adjustments.

The hip external rotation moment exhibited a significant interaction between the ACLR and CON groups (p<0.018) (Table 4). Using the post hoc test, the hip external rotation moment of the ACLR group (CPA1=0.46 ± 0.16 Nm/km, CPA2 = 0.44 ± 0.1 Nm/km) at CPA1 and 2 was significantly larger than that of the CON group (CPA1 = 0.27 ± 0.06 Nm/km, CPA2 = 0.32 ± 0.09 Nm/km). For other parameters, a main effect was observed only for the phase, and multiple comparisons showed that the hip flexion moments were significantly higher for CPA1 and 2 compared to APA1 and 2 (p <0.05). The moments of adduction and abduction were significantly higher in the following order: CPA1, CPA2, APA2, and APA1 (p <0.05). APA1 and 2 exhibited significantly higher internal and external rotation moments than CPA1 and 2 (p <0.05). There was no interaction between the phase and joint moments of each group, and a main effect of the phase was observed only for the knee joint moments. Multiple comparisons revealed that the flexion moments were significantly higher in CPA1 and 2 compared to APA1 and 2 (p <0.05). The moments of adduction and abduction were significantly higher in the CPA1, CPA2, APA2, and APA1 groups (p <0.05). The moments of internal and external rotation were significantly higher in the following order: CPA1, CPA2, APA2, and APA1 (p <0.05).

227053 Table 4. Hip and knee joint moments

Phase; Time (ms)	　	　	APA1; -150 ~ -50	APA2; -50 ~ 50	CPA1; 50 ~ 150	CPA2; 150 ~ 250	
	　		(95%CI)	(95%CI)	(95%CI)	(95%CI)	
Hip moment	Flexion+/	ACLR	0.41
(0.3 − 0.52)	0.34
(0.17 − 0.5)	2.02
(1.59 − 2.45)	1.84
(1.52 − 2.16)	
(Nm/kg)	Extension-	CON	0.49
(0.38 − 0.6)	0.45
(0.34 − 0.56)	2.05
(1.75 − 2.34)	1.86 (1.62 − 2.1)	
	Adduction+/	ACLR	-0.03
(-0.1 − 0.05)	0.23
(0.04 − 0.43)	1.24
(0.47 − 2.01)	0.78
(0.18 − 1.37)	
	Abduction-	CON	-0.08
(-0.13 − -0.02)	0.02
(-0.09 − 0.12)	0.56
(0.35 − 0.78)	0.39
(0.21 − 0.56)	
	Internal rotation+/	ACLR	-0.02
(-0.04 − 0.00)	-0.05
(-0.07 − -0.03)	-0.46
(-0.56 − -0.35)	-0.44
(-0.51 − -0.38)	
　	External rotation-	CON	-0.02
(-0.03 − -0.01)	-0.04
(-0.06 − -0.03)	-0.27
(-0.3 − -0.23)	-0.32
(-0.38 − -0.26)	
Knee moment	Flexion+/	ACLR	-0.21
(-0.26 − -0.15)	-0.01
(-0.14 − 0.11)	1.84
(1.54 − 2.14)	1.04
(0.77 − 1.31)	
(Nm/kg)	Extension-　	CON	-0.21
(-0.28 − -0.15)	-0.11
(-0.2 − -0.03)	1.61
(1.36 − 1.86)	0.91
(0.63 − 1.19)	
	Varus+/	ACLR	0.03
(-0.01 − 0.07)	0.25
(0.22 − 0.29)	0.94
(0.62 − 1.27)	0.64
(0.44 − 0.83)	
	Valgus-　	CON	0.02
(-0.01 − 0.05)	0.21
(0.16 − 0.26)	0.89
(0.61 − 1.16)	0.59
(0.36 − 0.81)	
	Internal rotation+/	ACLR	0.01
(0.00 − 0.01)	0.08
(0.07 − 0.09)	0.25
(0.19 − 0.31)	0.14
(0.11 − 0.17)	
　	External rotation- 　	CON	0.01
(0.00 − 0.01)	0.08
(0.06 − 0.09)	0.25
(0.19 − 0.32)	0.14
(0.07 − 0.2)	
Mean ± SD

ACLR, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. CON, control. APA, Anticipatory postural adjustments. CPA, compensatory postural adjustments.

* Significant difference between the ACLR and CON

DISCUSSION

This study aimed to elucidate differences in muscle activities during APAs and CPAs, as well as lower limb kinematics and kinetics between athletes with a history of ACLR and healthy athletes during single-leg landing. The hypotheses were: 1) muscle activity onset is delayed in the ACLR group compared to the control group; 2) muscle onset time is the same, but quadriceps activity in the compensatory phase is higher; and 3) hip adduction moment and knee abduction moment are higher in the ACLR group during landing. Contrary to these hypotheses, the results of this study revealed that female athletes who underwent RTS post-ACLR exhibited muscle activation patterns similar to those of healthy subjects in both anticipatory and compensatory phases of single-leg landings.

Onset times of muscle activity / IEMG

No significant differences were found in muscle activities during APAs and CPAs in any muscle between the ACLR and CON groups, which contradicts the study’s hypotheses. It has been suggested that factors such as muscle training29 and sensorimotor training included in rehabilitation may have contributed to early recovery of reflex excitability and motor neurons,30 enhancing neuromuscular control after ACLR.20 These may be adaptations due to learning by the central nervous system to plan anticipatory responses in advance.31 This finding aligns with previous research indicating that muscle activity in men after 14 months post-ACLR did not differ from that in healthy subjects.32 Furthermore, it suggests that female athletes who underwent RTS more than one year after ACLR may have recovered to a similar extent as healthy subjects in terms of muscle activation. Reduced muscle activity after RTS has been associated with poor performance and reduced dynamic stability of the knee during landing,33 underscoring the clinical significance of understanding changes in muscle activity at RTS.20,34 On the other hand, previous studies have reported earlier onset times or longer durations of muscle activities in the quadriceps and hamstring muscles before landing,35 indicating increased pre-muscle activity as a protective mechanism to stiffen the joint in preparation for impact after landing.36 However, these findings were mainly observed during the initial rehabilitation period (4 to 6 months post-surgery), whereas this study and others included subjects approximately 15 months32 and 60 months33 post-surgery. Thus, early EMG onset may only be evident during the initial rehabilitation period. These results emphasize the clinical importance of understanding changes in muscle activity during RTS.20,37 While the present study showed that factors leading to the risk of ACL injury by muscle activity onset were eliminated more than one year after ACLR, a reported secondary ACL injury rate of 9% in the involved leg within two years after ACLR3 suggests that other factors may still pose a risk for secondary ACL injury. ACLR has been associated with abnormal gamma loop activity, affecting the neuromuscular system through the spinal cord38 and sensory-motor deficits at the motor cortex level.39 Therefore, future research should explore changes in corticomotor excitability using functional MRI, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and H-reflexes to further understand these mechanisms.

Kinematics/Kinetics

The present study revealed a significant interaction in hip external rotation moments during the CPA phase, with higher values observed in the ACLR group compared to the CON group. However, no significant differences were found in lower limb joint angles between the two groups. Previous studies have shown that in kinematics, increased knee valgus and hip adduction angle during landing and cutting movements are risks for ACL injury,40,41 and decreased hip and knee flexion angles, along with increased GRF during such movements, can exert significant stress on the ACL.42 In kinetics, participants with smaller hip external rotator moments at the initial stage of landing were over eight times more likely to sustain a second ACL injury compared to those with greater hip external rotation moments.11 The similarity in lower limb joint angles between both groups in this study, alongside the increased hip external rotation moments in the ACLR group during CPAs, may be attributed to ACL injury prevention strategies implemented after ACLR, potentially affecting movement and postural control through kinetic changes. These strategies are considered ACLR-specific compensatory mechanisms aimed at reducing the angle of hip internal rotation occurring 50 ms post-IC, which corresponds to the feedback phase following sensory nerve input. Consequently, the high value of hip external rotation moment observed in this study may signify a postural strategy during single-leg landing movement after ACLR.

Limitations

This study had some limitations. First, lower limb muscle strength was not measured, which could have affected muscle activity during single-leg landing, especially considering reports indicating a relationship between muscle fiber conduction velocity and force in isometric contractions of the quadriceps during knee extension43 might cause a difference in muscle activity during single-leg landing. Second, the experiment was conducted in a laboratory setting and involved only single-leg landings, which may yield different responses compared to performance during actual sports activities. This context should be considered when interpreting the data. Third, the ACLR group comprised only female athletes who had returned to competition approximately one year or more after surgery, and it remained unclear when and to what extent muscle function had recovered. Therefore, longitudinal studies investigating ACLR muscle function and assessing training effects are warranted. Fourth, the study had a limited number of subjects, and only a post hoc power analysis was conducted. Despite the small sample size, meaningful results were obtained. Finally, this study only included the involved leg, although it is well-established that neuromuscular changes after ACL injury can also affect the contralateral leg.44 Including the contralateral leg in future studies will provide a better understanding of contralateral injury mechanisms and postural control after ACLR. In the future, it will be essential to examine the effects of post- ACLR status on muscle strength and surgical techniques.

Conclusion

The findings of the current study indicate that in female athletes who underwent RTS after ACLR, the onset of muscle activity during single-leg landing was similar to that of the control group. Both the amount and pattern of muscle activity during APAs and CPAs were similar to those observed in the control group. Additionally, no significant differences were observed in hip and knee joint angles between the two groups. However, during the CPA phase, the ACLR group exhibited higher values of hip external rotation moments compared to the control group. Clinically, this finding underscores the importance of assessing and addressing hip biomechanics and muscle function during rehabilitation to optimize movement quality and reduce the risk of secondary injuries. Future studies should investigate how variations in muscle strength affect neuromuscular control and landing mechanics, which could inform rehabilitation strategies aimed at optimizing strength and function.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank all the participants for their time and support. We would like to thank Editage (www.editage.jp) for English language editing.
==== Refs
Anterior cruciate ligament injury incidence in adolescent athletes: A systematic review and meta-analysis Am J Sports Med Bram J. T. Magee L. C. Mehta N. N. Patel N. M. Ganley T. J. 2021
49 1962 1972 10.1177/0363546520959619 10.1177/0363546520959619 33090889
Strength asymmetry and landing mechanics at return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction Med Sci Sports Exerc Schmitt L. C. Paterno M. V. Ford K. R. Myer G. D. Hewett T. E. 2015
47 1426 1434 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000560 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000560 25373481
Incidence of second ACL injuries 2 years after primary ACL reconstruction and return to sport Am J Sports Med Paterno M. V. Rauh M. J. Schmitt L. C. Ford K. R. Hewett T. E. 2014
42 1567 1573 10.1177/0363546514530088 10.1177/0363546514530088 24753238
Non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injury epidemiology in team-ball sports: A systematic review with meta-analysis by sex, age, sport, participation level, and exposure type Sports Med Chia L. De Oliveira Silva D. Whalan M.. 2022
52 2447 2467 10.1007/s40279-022-01697-w 10.1007/s40279-022-01697-w 35622227
Stiff landings are associated with increased ACL injury risk in young female basketball and floorball players Am J Sports Med Leppänen M. Pasanen K. Kujala U.M.. 2017
45 386 393 10.1177/0363546516665810 10.1177/0363546516665810 27637264
Neuromuscular training to target deficits associated with second anterior cruciate ligament injury J Orthop Sports Phys Ther Di Stasi S. Myer G. D. Hewett T. E. 2013
43 777 792 10.2519/jospt.2013.4693.Neuromuscular 10.2519/jospt.2013.4693.Neuromuscular 24175599
Lower limb biomechanics during single-leg landings following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis Sport Med Johnston P.T. McClelland J.A. Webster K.E. 2018
48 2103 2126 10.1007/s40279-018-0942-0 10.1007/s40279-018-0942-0
Improvement of anticipatory postural adjustments for balance control: effect of a single training session J Electromyogr Kinesiol Kanekar N. Aruin A. S. 2015
25 400 405 10.1016/j.jelekin.2014.11.002 10.1016/j.jelekin.2014.11.002 25434280
Emotion and consciousness: ends of a continuum Brain Res Alexandrov Y. I. Sams M. E. 2005
25 387 405 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2005.08.006 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2005.08.006
Hip and ankle kinematics in noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injury situations: Video analysis using model-based image matching Am J Sports Med Koga H. Nakamae A. Shima Y. Bahr R. Krosshaug T. 2018
46 333 340 10.1177/0363546517732750 10.1177/0363546517732750 29024605
Biomechanical measures during landing and postural stability predict second anterior cruciate ligament injury after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and return to sport Am J Sports Med Paterno M. V. Schmitt L. C. Ford K. R.. 2010
38 1968 1978 10.1177/0363546510376053 10.1177/0363546510376053 20702858
Clinically relevant injury patterns after an anterior cruciate ligament injury provide insight into injury mechanisms Am J Sports Med Levine J. W. Kiapour A. M. Quatman C. E.. 2013
41 385 395 10.1177/0363546512465167 10.1177/0363546512465167 23144366
Anterior cruciate ligament loading increases with pivot-shift mechanism during asymmetrical drop vertical jump in female athletes Orthop J Sports Med Ueno R. Navacchia A. Schilaty N. D. Myer G. D. Hewett T. E. Bates N. A. 2021
9 1 11 10.1177/2325967121989095 10.1177/2325967121989095
Early compensatory and anticipatory postural adjustments following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction Eur J Appl Physiol Labanca L. Laudani L. Casabona A. Menotti F. Mariani P. P. Macaluso A. 2015
115 1441 1451 10.1007/s00421-015-3126-8 10.1007/s00421-015-3126-8 25682323
Anticipatory responses to a self-applied load in normal subjects and hemiparetic patients J Physiol Paris Bennis N. Roby-Brami A. Dufossé M. Bussel B. 1996
90 27 42 10.1016/0928-4257(96)87166-x 10.1016/0928-4257(96)87166-x 8803852
The role of motor action in anticipatory postural adjustments studied with self-induced and externally triggered perturbations Exp Brain Res Aruin A. S. Latash M. L. 1995
106 291 300 10.1007/BF00241125 10.1007/BF00241125 8566194
Movement, posture and equilibrium: Interaction and coordination Prog Neurobiol Massion J. 1992
38 35 56 10.1016/0301-0082(92)90034-c 10.1016/0301-0082(92)90034-c 1736324
Postural feedback responses scale with biomechanical constraints in human standing Exp Brain Res Park S. Horak F. B. Kuo A. D. 2004
154 417 427 10.1007/s00221-003-1674-3 10.1007/s00221-003-1674-3 14618285
Postural responses triggered by multidirectional leg lifts and surface tilts Exp Brain Res Hughey L. K. Fung J. 2005
165 152 166 10.1007/s00221-005-2295-9 10.1007/s00221-005-2295-9 15940494
Central nervous system adaptation after ligamentous injury: A summary of theories, evidence, and clinical interpretation Sports Med Needle A.R. Lepley A.S. Grooms D.R. 2017
47 20 1271 1288 10.1007/s40279-016-0666-y 28005191
Lower limb kinematic alterations during drop vertical jumps in female athletes who have undergone anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction J Orthop Res Delahunt E. Sweeney L. Chawke M.. 2012
30 72 78 10.1002/jor.21504 10.1002/jor.21504 21809380
Development of recommendations for SEMG sensors and sensor placement procedures J Electromyogr Kinesiol Hermens H. J. Freriks B. Disselhorst-Klug C. Rau G. Günter 2000
10 361 374 10.1016/s1050-6411(00)00027-4 10.1016/s1050-6411(00)00027-4 11018445
Measurement of lower extremity kinematics during level walking J Orthop Res Kadaba M. P. Ramakrishnan H. K. Wootten M. E. 1990
8 383 392 10.1002/jor.1100080310 10.1002/jor.1100080310 2324857
A gait analysis data collection and reduction technique Hum Mov Sci Davis R. B. Õunpuu S. Tyburski D. Gage J. R. 1991
10 575 588 10.1016/0167-9457(91)90046-z 10.1016/0167-9457(91)90046-z
Comparative adaptations of lower limb biomechanics during unilateral and bilateral landings after different neuromuscular-based ACL injury prevention protocols J Strength Cond Res Brown T. N. Palmieri-Smith R. M. McLean S. G. 2014
28 2859 2871 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000472 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000472 24714537
The reliability of electromechanical delay and torque during isometric and concentric isokinetic contractions J Electromyogr Kinesiol Howatson G. Glaister M. Brouner J. van Someren K. A. 2009
19 975 979 10.1016/j.jelekin.2008.02.002 10.1016/j.jelekin.2008.02.002 18381243
Effect of low pass filtering on joint moments from inverse dynamics: Implications for injury prevention J Biomech Kristianslund E. Krosshaug T. Van den Bogert A. J. 2012
45 666 671 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.12.011 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.12.011 22227316
G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences Behav Res Methods Faul F. Erdfelder E. Lang A.-G. Buchner A. 2007
39 175 191 10.3758/bf03193146 10.3758/bf03193146 17695343
Muscle onset can be improved by therapeutic exercise: a systematic review Phys Ther Sport Crow J. Pizzari T. Buttifant D. 2011
12 29 199 209 10.1016/j.ptsp.2010.12.002 10.1016/j.ptsp.2010.12.002 22085715
Specific adaptations of neuromuscular control and knee joint stiffness following sensorimotor training Int J Sports Med Gruber M. Bruhn S. Gollhofer A. 2006
27 30 636 641 10.1055/s-2005-872904 10.1055/s-2005-872904 16874591
Postural adjustments following ACL rupture and reconstruction: A longitudinal study Int J Sports Med Labanca L. Laudani L. Mariani P. P. Macaluso A. 2018
39 549 554 10.1055/a-0599-6401 10.1055/a-0599-6401 29954028
Successful feed-forward strategies following ACL injury and reconstruction J Electromyogr Kinesiol Bryant A.L. Newton R.U. Steele J. 2009
19 32 988 997 10.1016/j.jelekin.2008.06.001 10.1016/j.jelekin.2008.06.001 18656383
Altered neuromuscular activity of the lower extremities during landing tasks in patients with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review of electromyographic studies J Sport Rehabil He X. Leong H. T. Lau O. Y. Ong M. T-Y. Yung P. S-H. 2020
29 1194 1203 10.1123/jsr.2019-0393 10.1123/jsr.2019-0393 32357316
Timing of muscle activation is altered during single-leg landing tasks after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at the time of return to sport Clin J Sport Med Rocchi J. E. Labanca L. Laudani L. Minganti C. Mariani P. P. Macaluso A. 2020
30 e186 e193 10.1097/jsm.0000000000000659 30418218
Neuromuscular activity of the lower - extremities during running, landing and changing - of - direction movements in individuals with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction : a review of electromyographic studies J Exp Orthop Georgoulis J. D. Melissaridou D. Patras K.. 2023
10 43 10.1186/s40634-023-00603-1 10.1186/s40634-023-00603-1 37058177
Muscular reflexes elicited by electrical stimulation of the anterior cruciate ligament in humans J Appl Physiol Dyhre-Poulsen P. Krogsgaard M. R. 2000
89 6 2191 2195 10.1152/jappl.2000.89.6.2191 10.1152/jappl.2000.89.6.2191 11090567
Current concepts for injury prevention in athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction Am J Sports Med Hewett T.E. Di Stasi S.L. Myer G.D. 2013
41 216 224 10.1177/0363546512459638 10.1177/0363546512459638 23041233
Proprioceptive deficit in individuals with unilateral tearing of the anterior cruciate ligament after active evaluation of the sense of joint position Rev Bras Ortop Cossich V. Mallrich F. Titonelli V. de Sousa E. B. Velasques B. Salles J. I. 2014
49 607 612 10.1016/j.rboe.2013.07.003 10.1016/j.rboe.2013.07.003 26229869
Permanent knee sensorimotor system changes following ACL injury and surgery Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Nyland J. Gamble C. Franklin T. Caborn D.N.M. 2017
25 1461 1474 10.1007/s00167-017-4432-y 10.1007/s00167-017-4432-y 28154888
Anterior cruciate ligament injuries in female athletes: Part 1, mechanisms and risk factors Am J Sports Med Hewett T.E. Myer G.D. Ford K.R. 2006
34 299 311 10.1177/0363546505284183 10.1177/0363546505284183 16423913
Sex and limb differences in hip and knee kinematics and kinetics during anticipated and unanticipated jump landings: Implications for anterior cruciate ligament injury Br J Sports Med Brown T. N. Palmieri-Smith R. M. McLean S. G. 2009
43 1049 1056 10.1136/bjsm.2008.055954 10.1136/bjsm.2008.055954 19372596
Changing sagittal plane body position during single-leg landings influences the risk of non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injury Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Shimokochi Y. Ambegaonkar J. P. Meyer E. G. Lee S. Y. Shultz S. J. 2013
21 888 897 10.1007/s00167-012-2011-9 10.1007/s00167-012-2011-9 22543471
Muscle fibre conduction velocity, mean power frequency, mean EMG voltage and force during submaximal fatiguing contractions of human quadriceps Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol Arendt-Nielsen L. Mills K.R. 1988
58 20 25 10.1007/BF00636598 10.1007/BF00636598 3203668
ACL rupture is a single leg injury but a double leg problem: too much focus on ‘symmetry’ alone and that’s not enough! Benjaminse A. Holden S. Myer G. D. 2019
52 1029 1030 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098502 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098502
