Known-group validity of passive knee joint position sense: a comparison between individuals with unilateral anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and healthy controls

Abstract

Abstract Background Knee joint position sense (JPS) might be negatively affected after injuries to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). Recent systematic reviews suggest further investigation of psychometric properties, including validity, of knee JPS tests following ACL reconstruction (ACLR). This study investigated the known-group validity by comparing knee JPS errors between individuals who underwent unilateral ACLR and healthy controls. Methods This cross-sectional study involved 36 men, including 19 after ACLR (ACLR group) and 17 healthy controls (control group). In both groups, the absolute error (AE), constant error (CE) and variable error (VE) of passive knee JPS were calculated in the flexion and extension directions, for two target angles (30° and 60° flexion) per direction. Discriminative validity was evaluated by comparing JPS errors between the operated and non-operated knees in the ACLR group. Known-group validity was evaluated by comparing JPS errors between the operated knees in the ACLR group and the asymptomatic non-dominant knees of healthy controls. Results Mean AE, CE and VE for all tests were 4.1°, − 2.3° and 3.6° for the operated knees in the ACLR group, 5.5°, − 2.6° and 3.3° for the non-operated knees in the ACLR group and 4.6°, − 2.6° and 3.3° for the non-dominant knees in the control group, respectively, regardless of the test direction and target angle. The operated knees in the ACLR group did not show significantly greater JPS errors compared to the contralateral knees in the ACLR group and to the non-dominant knees in the control group (p ≥ 0.05). On the other hand, the non-operated knees showed significantly greater AE for the 0°–60° flexion test (p = 0.025) and CE for the 0°–30° flexion test (p = 0.024) than the operated knees in the ACLR group. JPS errors did not significantly differ in the operated knees in the ACLR group based on the direction of movement and the target angle. However, the errors were significantly higher when the knee was moved through a greater range compared to that of a lesser range between the starting and target angles. Conclusion The ACLR knees did not show greater passive JPS errors than the contralateral or control knees. The direction of movement and target angle did not influence the JPS acuity after ACLR. However, higher JPS errors were evident when the knee was moved through a greater range compared to a lesser range of motion. Further studies investigating the psychometric properties of standardized JPS tests following ACLR are warranted.