| Abstract [eng] |
Goal of the research: to determine leg function recovery for patients in 6-8 months after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Research objectives: 1. To determine and compare thigh circumference, knee extensors and flexors strength in experimental and control group. 2. To determine and compare knee extensors and flexors endurance in experimental and control group. 3. To determine and compare static and dynamic balance in experimental and control group. 4. To investigate agility in experimental and control group. Methods and materials: Study included 20 subjects after ACL reconstruction (experimental group) and 20 healthy subjects (control group). All subjects were examined one time. Thigh circumference was assesed using measuring tape. Knee flexor and extensor strength, endurance difference between legs and knee flexor and extensor muscle strenght ratio were investigated using isokinetic dynamometer. Participants' balance was observed with Balance Error Scoring System for static balance and Modified Star Excursion Balance test for dynamic balance. Agility was measured using Quadrant Jump test. Results: Experimantal group‘s thigh circumference difference between involved and uninvolved leg was 0,15 ± 0,49cm, while in control group – 0,05 ± 0,22 cm (p>0,05). Also there was no different among groups (p>0,05). In experimental group involved knee extensors strength was 20,77 Nm lower than in uninvolved leg (p<0,05), and 23,45 Nm lower than in control group dominant leg (p<0,05). In experimantal group involved knee flexors strength was 10,53 Nm lower than in uninvolved leg (p<0,05), and 14,57 Nm lower than in control group dominant leg (p<0,05). There was significant difference between both legs knee extensors and flexors strength (p<0,05). Experimental and control group knee flexor and extensor ratio at 60°/s and 180°/s angular velocity were lower than standart values (p<0,05). Involved knee extensors endurance was 78,80 J, knee flexors endurance – 87,77 J lower than in uninvolved leg in experimental group (p<0,05). There were no differences between both groups (p>0,05). No significant differences in both groups were found in static balance, meanwhile significant dynamic balance values were found in anterior reach distance (p<0,05). No significant agility differences were found in both groups (p>0,05). Conclusions: 1. A) There was no different among patients involved and uninvolved thigh circumference, also there was no different among groups (p>0,05). B) Experimental groups involved knee extensors and flexors strength was lower than uninvolved leg and lower than control group‘s dominant and nondominant legs (p<0,05). In both groups knee flexors and extensors ratio was lower than standart values (p<0,05). 2. Experimental group‘s involved knee extensors and flexors endurance was lower than in uninvolved leg (p<0,05). There were no differences between both groups (p>0,05). 3. Experimental group involved leg dynamic balance was worse than in uninvolved leg and in control group (p<0,05). Static balance did not differed in both groups (p>0,05). 4. No significant agility differences were found in both groups (p>0,05). |
