Reason Profiles for not Returning to Preinjury Activity Level Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction- A Latent Class Analysis With Subgroup Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

Background: Given the high proportion of athletes who do not return to sports (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), strategies are needed to identify at-risk patients and optimize rehabilitation for successful RTS after ACLR.

Purpose/hypothesis: This study used latent class analysis (LCA) to characterize a unique clustering of reasons why athletes do not return to their preinjury activity level after ACLR. We hypothesized that patients with high pain scores and high levels of fear would be less likely to return to their preinjury activity level.

Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods: All patients at a single institution who underwent primary ACLR between 2005 and 2021 were contacted to complete a survey via REDCap. Patients' ability to RTS and their preinjury activity level, reasons for inability to return to the preinjury activity level, and patient-reported outcome scores were collected from 981 patients. LCA was performed to identify and compare patterns among patients' reasons for not returning to the preinjury activity level.

Results: Of the 981 patients included, only 446 (45.5%) were fully able to return to their preinjury activity level. LCA categorized patients into 3 groups based on their reasons for not returning to preinjury activity levels: a high-function group (75.5%), which reported no barriers; a multisymptom group (16.1%), which cited pain, lack of strength, and instability; and a fear-limited group (8.4%), which reported fear as the sole reason. Among the high-function group, 86.2% reported RTS compared with <36.7% in the other classes. There was no difference in Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales-including Pain, Symptoms, or Activities of Daily Living-between the high-function and fear-limited groups; however, the multisymptom group presented with the lowest scores in all KOOS subscales ( < .001). In addition, patient characteristics, the time from the index ACLR to the follow-up, and subsequent revision ACLR were similar between groups; however, the multisymptom profile demonstrated the highest proportion of allograft ACLR ( = .04) and secondary ipsilateral surgery ( < .001). Overall subjective knee grade (1-100) and Marx scores were highest in the high-function group, followed by fear-limited and multisymptom groups ( < .001).

Conclusion: Patients were differentiated into 3 distinct classes after primary ACLR. Furthermore, those with patient-reported characteristics of pain, lack of strength, instability, or fear were significantly less likely to return to their preinjury activity level or sport.