Data Nerds is a new series that we are introducing which will be alternating weeks with our usual journal club podcast. In this series, we share cases from our clinical practice where we utilize objective testing to inform our decision making, with most attention paid to the results of the tests and interpretation of the information. Therefore, this works best when you can see the numbers. Luckily, these are uploaded to our YouTube channel! Check us out at https://www.youtube.com/@ReadingRehab.

This week, Mike shares a recent case of a runner presenting with a left posteromedial tibial bone stress injury, but he is also 8 months post-op ACLR! Listen to hear how his poor quad strength impacted his running gait!

This week we discuss multi-ligament knee injuries. These are uncommon, but devastating injuries. In athletes, return to sport rates are as high as 53%, but in higher competitive levels it could be more like 23%. The authors note there is a lack of evidence describing return to sport testing in this population, which they attempt to rectify with this article. They describe different phases of rehab, expected timelines for various activities (walking, running, cutting, etc), and objective markers to look to achieve at different time periods (ex. >65% quad strength LSI at 4 months). Tables 1 and 2 are very helpful to summarize this information quickly and give actionable methods.

The abstract can be found here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35141534/

As always, if you enjoy what you hear, be sure to follow us on your favorite podcast platform and on Instagram @readingrehabpod. If you have any article recommendations be sure to send them our way!

This week we discuss isokinetic testing for shoulder internal and external rotation strength! This scoping review had a lot of promise, but unfortunately it did not live up to the hype for us. We learned there is a lot of heterogenity in testing set ups, but the seated 90/90 position is the most common, with 60 and 180 degrees per second being the most common speeds tested. The most common objective measures from these tests are peak torque and ER:IR ratio, but there are a lot of variations of ER:IR ratio looking at differences in concentric and eccentric force outputs. The information we wished this article gave was the average values for peak torque and ER:IR ratio from each of the studies so clinicians would be able to have a general idea of benchmark scores their patients should be hitting. We feel this is a big missed opportunity which could have made this paper a 10/10!

The abstract can be found here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39628773/

As always, if you enjoy what you hear, be sure to follow us on your favorite podcast platform and on Instagram @readingrehabpod. If you have any article recommendations be sure to send them our way!