{"id":27983,"date":"2026-05-26T22:30:16","date_gmt":"2026-05-26T20:30:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.physiotutors.com\/?post_type=research&p=27983"},"modified":"2026-05-26T21:48:53","modified_gmt":"2026-05-26T19:48:53","slug":"aclr-return-to-sport-test-batteries","status":"publish","type":"research","link":"https:\/\/www.physiotutors.com\/research\/aclr-return-to-sport-test-batteries\/","title":{"rendered":"Beyond the Clinic: Do Physiotherapy Clinic-Based ACLR Return-to-Sport Test Batteries Capture Full Readiness? A Comparison with the Gold Standard"},"featured_media":27991,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_relevanssi_hide_post":"","_relevanssi_hide_content":"","_relevanssi_pin_for_all":"","_relevanssi_pin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_unpin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_include_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_exclude_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_no_append":"","_relevanssi_related_not_related":"","_relevanssi_related_posts":"","_relevanssi_noindex_reason":""},"featured-tag":[],"tracking_tag":[2197,2199],"class_list":["post-27983","research","type-research","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","tracking_tag-knee","tracking_tag-sports-rtp"],"acf":{"free_access":"unfree","app_link":"https:\/\/app.physiotutors.com\/research-reviews\/ACLR-Return-to-Sport-Test-Batteries","sections":[{"acf_fc_layout":"page-header-small","background":{"background_image":27990,"background_image_alt_text":"ACLR Return-to-Sport Test Batteries"},"heading":"Beyond the Clinic: Do Physiotherapy Clinic-Based ACLR Return-to-Sport Test Batteries Capture Full Readiness? A Comparison with the Gold Standard","subheading":"Werner et al. (2026)","benefits":[{"benefit":"Passing RTS testing does not mean complete recovery. Important deficits in RTD and biomechanics remained despite excellent hop and strength symmetry"},{"benefit":"Explosive force production may matter more than maximal strength. RTD deficits were much larger than peak strength deficits and may better reflect sport readiness"},{"benefit":"Athletes still underload the reconstructed limb. Even \u201ccleared\u201d athletes continued using protective landing strategies during dynamic tasks"}]},{"acf_fc_layout":"content","background_color":"none","content_alignment":"left","content_editor":"

Introduction<\/h2>\r\nAlthough widely supported and recommended, a recent survey<\/a> of physiotherapists concluded that return-to-sport testing is not regularly performed in clinical settings. One of the reasons, therefore, is the lack of equipment available. This is a problematic finding, as passing a return-to-sport test battery<\/a> consisting of strength, performance-based metrics, and self-reported knee function is associated with reduced anterior cruciate ligament reinjury risk and improved return-to-sport rates. The authors of the current study highlighted that one of the barriers to this discrepancy is the reported use of specialized equipment like expensive isokinetic dynamometers, which are unavailable in physiotherapy practice. To overcome this barrier, several attempts have been made to construct physiotherapy-approved return-to-sport assessments that are applicable for use and effectively implemented in real-life. But to support their use, we must be certain that the clinic-based return-to-sport test batteries are valid when compared to the gold standard examinations. Therefore, this study examined how a clinic-based return-to-sport testing battery performed against a gold standard and whether residual strength or biomechanical deficits remained in those passing the test battery.\u00a0<\/span>\r\n\r\n \r\n

Methods<\/h2>\r\nThis was a cross-sectional study involving athletes aged 10-25 years who had undergone unilateral ACL reconstruction (ACLR) within the previous 5-15 months. The participants intended to return to cutting-and-pivoting sports (level 1 or 2 sports such as soccer, basketball, volleyball, gymnastics, hockey, martial arts, etc.).<\/span>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_27984\" align=\"alignnone\" width=\"1236\"]\"ACLR From: Werner et al., Orthop J Sports Med (2026)[\/caption]\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nPatients were excluded if they had previous surgery to either knee, multiligament reconstruction, and\/or significant additional surgical procedures.<\/span>\r\n\r\nThe patients were invited to t<\/span>he clinic-based return-to-sport test battery when either their physiotherapist or the surgeon determined that they were physically capable of performing the tests. <\/span>The test battery was intentionally designed to be realistic and accessible for physiotherapy clinics. Participants had to pass ALL of the following:<\/span>\r\n