Use of electromyography biofeedback in rehabilitation of patients after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Objective

To synthesise the evidence available of the effects of EMG-BF for treatment of quadriceps muscle atrophy after ACL reconstruction.

Methods

XXX

Results

XXX

Conclusions

XXX

PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42020193768

Keywords

Biofeedback - Neurofeedback - Rehabilitation - Physical Rehabilitation Medicine - ACL - Anterior Cruciate Ligament - Knee - Quadriceps - Muscular Atrophy - Arthrogenic Muscle Inhibition

KEY MESSAGES:

  • .
  • .
  • .

Summary of Findings table

Table 1: Summary of Findings table.

Introduction

Description of the condition: In the setting of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury and reconstruction, patients suffer from arthrogenic muscle inhibition (AMI) which causes muscle atrophy of the quadriceps. Several rehabilitation approaches have been employed to relieve pain and improve motor function on these patients, including the use of electromyography biofeedback (EMG-BF).

Description of the intervention: EMG-BF detects the electric activity of muscle fibers and with this, it delivers a visual or auditory stimulus (a light or sound of different intensity depending on the intensity of the muscle activity). These signals have been used as a form of reinforcement that allows concentrating the subject’s activity in carrying out an action, being used frequently in paretic muscles.

How the intervention might work: The fact that the patient recognizes the stimulus and interprets it as muscular activity of greater or lesser intensity, allows integrating the action influencing from the genesis of the movement, reinforcing proprioceptive stimuli and delivering information on performance, thus allowing immediate corrections to be made. This last, increases the effectiveness of each contraction attempt made by the patient.

Why it is important to do this review: The goal of this review is to evaluate the use of EMG-BF in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction. In the case that utility is demonstrated with this intervention, this could be a first step to implement a massive use of this therapy that today is applied in few patients given its high cost and difficulty of portability.

Methods

XXX

Search strategies

We conducted a computerized search on the following electronic databases: EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL and Epistemonikos. There was no language restriction.

The following strategy was used to search on MEDLINE (PubMed): (“ACL reconstruction” OR “anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction” OR “Quadriceps muscle atrophy” OR “Arthrogenic muscle atrophy”) AND (“Electromyography biofeedback” OR “Neurofeedback” OR “Electromyogram biofeedback training” OR “Biofeedback training” OR “biofeedback therapy” OR “biofeedback treatment” OR “biofeedback” OR “Nintendo Wii” OR “video games” OR “xbox fitness” OR “kinect xbox”) AND (“Physical therapy” OR “Rehabilitation medicine” OR “Rehabilitation” OR “Physical and rehabilitation medicine” OR “physiotherapy” OR “conventional physiothera” OR “physiotherapy treatment”)

The MEDLINE strategy was adapted to the syntax and subject headings for the other databases.

Eligibility criteria

Types of studies In this review we include randomised controlled trials and control trials.

Types of participants Inclusion criteria: patients who underwent a primary anatomic ACL reconstruction, both males and females, over 18 years old. Exclusion criteria: patients under 18 years old, previous knee surgeries, ACL revision surgery, meniscal repair during surgery.

Type of interventions Biofeedback treatment as the sole treatment or as a part of a combination therapy with other physical interventions.

The comparison of interest is with physical therapy not including biofeedback.

Types of outcomes

  • Primary outcome: muscle strength
    • Measures of effect: quadriceps isokinetic strength
  • Secondary outcomes
    • Physical function (IKDC)
    • Pain (VAS)
    • Quality of life
    • Quadriceps volume (ultrasound measurement)

Selection of studies

Two authors independently screened the titles and abstracts yielded by the search against the inclusion criteria. We obtained 9 full reports for the 11 titles that appear to meet the inclusion criteria. For the other 2, we were not able to obtain the one from Draper et. al from 1997, however, within the included studies we have two by the same author from the years 1990 and 1991. In the other case, we seek additional information from a study by contacting directly the author via email and she sent the full text so we could use it for the review. In case of disagreement, two of the authors resolved it through discussion. ACA DEBERIAMOS PONER LOS INCLUIDOS Y LAS RAZONES POR LAS QUE ELMINAMOS LOS OTROS We will outline the study selection process in A PRISMA flow chart. (see an example)

Extraction and management of data

Using standardised forms, two reviewers extracted the data independently from each included study. To ensure consistency, we conducted calibration exercises before starting the review. Data abstracted included demographic information, methodology, population and intervention, comparison and outcome details. We resolved disagreements by discussion, and one arbitrator adjudicate unresolved disagreements.

Risk of bias assessment

Two reviewers will independently assess risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias (HOW TO CITE COCHRANE PRODUCTS) which considers random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of participants, personnel and outcomes, incomplete outcome data, selective outcome reporting and other sources of bias. A judgment will be made from the extracted information, rated as ‘high risk’ or ‘low risk’. If there is insufficient detail reported in the study, we will judge the risk of bias as ‘unclear’ and the original study investigators will be contacted for more information. Disagreements will be resolved first by discussion and then by consulting a third author for arbitration. We will compute graphic representations of potential bias within and across studies using RevMan 5.1 (Review Manager 5.1) (HOW TO CITE COCHRANE PRODUCTS).

Measures of treatment effect

For dichotomous outcomes we will express the estimate of treatment effect of an intervention as risk ratios (RR) together with 95% CIs. For continuous outcomes we will use mean difference and SD to summarise the data and 95% CIs. Where continuous outcomes are measured using different scales, the treatment effect will be expressed as a standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI.

Dealing with missing data Where possible, we will attempt to contact the original authors of the study to obtain any missing data. If important numerical missing data cannot be obtained, an imputation method will be used.

Assessment of heterogeneity We will assess the variations in treatment effect from the different trials by means of a formal statistical test (Q statistic) and the I2 statistic. We will consider heterogeneity statistically significant if the p value is <0.1. A rough guide to the interpretation of the I2 statistic given in the Cochrane Handbook is: 0–40% might not be important, 30–60% may represent moderate heterogeneity, 50–90% may represent substantial heterogeneity and 75–100% considerable heterogeneity.

Strategy for data synthesis

We will only conduct a meta-analysis if there are studies sufficiently homogeneous in terms of design, population, interventions and comparators reporting the same outcome measures. The results for clinically homogeneous studies will be meta-analysed using the Review Manager Software (RevMan 2011) (HOW TO CITE COCHRANE PRODUCTS). Meta-analysis will be conducted using the inverse variance method. A random effect model will be used. Separate meta-analyses will be presented for specific populations or interventions if statistically significant heterogeneity is explained by some of these, or if a convincing subgroup effect is found. For any outcomes where insufficient data are found for a meta-analysis, a narrative synthesis will be presented.

Subgroup and sensitivity analysis

Subgroup analyses We propose to undertake this review and provide an overview of the effects of INTERVENTION for PARTICIPANTS in general.

Investigation of heterogeneity If inconsistency is high, this will be reported. If unexpected clinical or methodological heterogeneity is found for reasons that are obvious, we will state hypotheses regarding these for future versions of this review. We do not anticipate undertaking additional analyses in this version.

Assessment of certainty of evidence

The quality of evidence for all outcomes will be judged using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group methodology (GRADE Working Group) (The GRADE Working Group. List of GRADE working group publications and grants. http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/index.htm (accessed 18 Jun 2015)) The certainty of evidence will be assessed across the domains of risk of bias, consistency, directness, precision and publication bias. Certainty will be adjudicated as high, moderate, low or very low.

Results

Risk of bias in the included studies

Summary plots

Traffic light plots

Efficacy of electromyography biofeedback in rehabilitation of patients after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

XXX

Primary outcome: muscle strength.

No reportado por los estudios incluidos.

Secondary outcomes

Pain

#Funnel plot

#Gráfico de forest plot

Functionality

XXX

#Funnel plot

#Gráfico de forest plot

Other outcomes

Extension

#Funnel plot

#Gráfico de forest plot

Balance

#Funnel plot

#Gráfico de forest plot

Discussion

XXX

Notes

Acknowledgements

xxx

Roles and contributions

All the review authors drafted and revised the protocol, conducted article screening and data collection, and drafted and revised the review.

Competing interests

All authors declare no financial relationships with any organisation that might have a real or perceived interest in this work. There are no other relationships or activities that might have influenced the submitted work.

PROSPERO registration number CRD42020193768

Ethics

As researchers will not access information that could lead to the identification of an individual participant, obtaining ethical approval was waived.

Data sharing

All data related to the project will be available.

REFERENCES.

1
2
3
4
etc

Apendices

Excluidos
Autor y año Título Diseño Razón exclusión
Corey 2015 The efficacy of post-operative devices following knee arthroscopic surgery: a systematic review RS Diseño
Culvenor 2013 Dynamic Single-Leg Postural Control Is Impaired Bilaterally Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Implications for Reinjury Risk Transversal Diseño
Clark 2014 Assessment of standing balance deficits in people who have undergone anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using traditional and modern analysis methods Observacional Pregunta
Wasielewski 2000 Evaluation of electromyographic biofeedback for the quadriceps femoris: a systematic review RS Diseño
Noyes 2016 Prevention of permanent arthrofibrosis after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction alone or combined with associated procedures: a prospective study in 443 knees Prospectivo observacional Pregunta
Muller 2012 Simulated activity but real trauma: a systematic review on Nintendo Wii injuries based on a case report of an acute anterior cruciate ligament rupture RS Pregunta
Taylor 2017 Real-time optimized biofeedback utilizing sport techniques (ROBUST):
a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
RCT Pregunta
How is Low Level Laser Therapy effective in improving pain and functions in patients with anterior
cruciate ligament reconstruction compared to conventional therapy?
Pregunta
Hunt 2020 Osteoarthritis year in review 2019: mechanics Review Pregunta
Gatewood 2017 The efficacy of post-operative devices following knee arthroscopic surgery: a systematic review RS Diseño
Culvenor 2016 Dynamic Single-Leg Postural Control Is Impaired Bilaterally Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Implications for Reinjury Risk Transversal Pregunta
Perraton 2014 Quadriceps and hamstring strength, control and activation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Relationship with knee function Transversal Pregunta
Seneyake 1991 3-D kinematics and neuromuscular signals’ integration for post ACL reconstruction recovery assessment Observacional Pregunta