Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Two factors that may underpin outstanding outcomes after ACL rehabilitation
  1. H Grindem1,
  2. M A Risberg1,
  3. I Eitzen2
  1. 1Norwegian Research Center for Active Rehabilitation, Department of Sports Medicine, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway
  2. 2Norwegian Research Center for Active Rehabilitation, Department of Orthopaedics, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
  1. Correspondence to Dr Hege Grindem, NIMI/NAR, PB 3843 Ullevål Stadion, Oslo 0855, Norway; hege.grindem{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Because ACL reconstruction does not automatically lead to successful outcomes and return to play,1 ,2 active rehabilitation is a realistic option that is being adopted by an increasing number of patients.3 In the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort Study, we found no differences in 2-year knee function, sports participation or new knee injuries between patients treated with ACL reconstruction followed by progressive preoperative and postoperative active rehabilitation, and patients treated with active rehabilitation alone.4 In our 2015 paper, we found that 86–94% of our ACL reconstruction and active rehabilitation group reported 2-year Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) within …

View Full Text


  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles