Page 33 - Demo

A review on range of tibial rotation312(5) Studies using cadavers(6) Studies using a Motion Capture Systems/in vivo tracking systems(7) no English or Dutch full text availableAccording to the PRISMA guidelines, two independent reviewers reviewed titles, abstracts and full text articles. In case of debate on inclusion of an article a third independent reviewer was consulted.Next a quality assessment was performed. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of all the selected studies. For nonrandomised trials the 7-item Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies – of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was used.29 To assess the quality of the included randomised trials the five-item Risk of Bias in randomized trials (RoB 2.0) tool was used.17 Both tools are recommended by the Cochrane Scientific Committee to be used in systematic reviews. Results A total of 2383 studies were screened for eligibility. After screening of title and abstracts 222 remained for full text assessment. 44 articles had no English full text available or were abstract only reports of scientific presentations. After reading full text another 165 were excluded based on the exclusion criteria listed above. Ultimately, four studies describing ACL deficient subjects and nine studies describing tibial rotation in ACL reconstructed subjects were included for analysis. See Figure 1. All included full text articles were explored for the amount tibial rotation measured. If applicable, internal and external tibial rotation were noted separately. An overview of reported ranges of tibial rotation is provided in Tables 1 and 2.Mark Zee.indd 31 03-01-2024 08:56