@article {Blasimann2020.03.05.20031617, author = {Angela Blasimann and Irene Koenig and Isabel Baert and Heiner Baur and Dirk Vissers}, title = {Which assessments are used to analyze neuromuscular control after an anterior cruciate ligament injury to determine readiness to return to sports? A systematic review}, elocation-id = {2020.03.05.20031617}, year = {2020}, doi = {10.1101/2020.03.05.20031617}, publisher = {Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press}, abstract = {Background Adequate neuromuscular control of the knee could be one element to prevent secondary injuries after an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. However, it is unclear which measurements should be used for a safe return to sports (RTS). Therefore, we aimed to summarize assessments for neuromuscular control of the knee after an ACL injury to decide upon readiness for RTS.Methods The systematic review followed the guidelines of Preferred Reporting of Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and has been listed in PROSPERO. The search in MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, SPORTDiscus and the Web of Science yielded to studies identifying assessments using electromyography (EMG) for neuromuscular control during dynamic activities in patients with an ACL injury. Risk of bias was assessed with a modified Downs and Black checklist.Results A total of 1178 records were identified through database search. After screening, 31 articles could be included for analysis. Another 6 articles could be included from hand search of reference lists of the included articles, resulting in a total of 37 articles. EMG was used in all studies as method to assess neuromuscular control. Risk of bias was medium to high due to an unclear description of participants and prior interventions, confounding factors and incompletely reported results.Conclusion Despite a wide range of EMG outcome measures for neuromuscular control, none was used to decide upon a safe RTS in ACL patients. Future studies should aim at finding valid and reliable assessments for RTS in ACL patients.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=122188. Funding StatementFirst author received working hours form the Bern University of Applied Sciences as grant for non-tenured staff.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data referred to in the manuscript are available from the first author upon request.ACLanterior cruciate ligament;ACL-Ranterior cruciate ligament reconstruction;EMGelectromyography;LSILimb Symmetry Index;RTSreturn to sports;TASTegner Activity Score}, URL = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/07/13/2020.03.05.20031617}, eprint = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/07/13/2020.03.05.20031617.full.pdf}, journal = {medRxiv} }