@article{ref1,
title="Recovery, rehabilitation, and return to full duty in a military population after a recent injury: differences between lower-extremity and spine injuries",
journal="Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation",
year="2022",
author="Rhon, Daniel I. and Teyhen, Deydre S. and Kiesel, Kyle and Shaffer, Scott W. and Goffar, Stephen L. and Greenlee, Tina A. and Plisky, Phillip J.",
volume="4",
number="1",
pages="e17-e27",
abstract="PURPOSE: To compare readiness to return to duty in soldiers following recent lower-extremity versus spine injury. The secondary purposes were to provide normative data for the Selective Functional Movement Assessment Top Tier movements (SFMA-TTM) and assess the association between SFMA-TTM scores and future injury occurrence, comparing injuries of the lower extremity and thoracic/lumbar spine. <br><br>METHODS: SFMA was rated by trained assessors on 480 U.S. Army soldiers within 2 weeks of being cleared to return to duty after recent lower-extremity or lumbar/thoracic injury. Participants were followed for 1 year to determine incidence of subsequent time-loss injury. <br><br>RESULTS: Only 74.4% of soldiers felt 100% mission capable when returning to full duty (73.6% lower-extremity; 76.5% spine). After 1 year, 37.9% had sustained a time-loss injury, and pain with movement at baseline was associated with higher odds for having an injury (odd ratio 1.53 95% confidence interval 1.04-2.24; P =.032). Almost all (99.8%) had at least 1 dysfunctional pattern, and 44.1% had pain with at least 1 movement (40.3% with previous lower-extremity injury; 54.6% with previous spine injury) after being cleared to return to duty. <br><br>CONCLUSIONS: One in four patients did not feel 100% mission capable upon being cleared for full duty. Pain with movement was also associated with future injury. Regardless of recent injury type, 99.8% of soldiers returned to full unrestricted duty with at least 1dysfunctional movement pattern and 44.1% had pain with at least 1 of the SFMA-TTM movements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative cohort study.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="2666-061X",
doi="10.1016/j.asmr.2021.09.028",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2021.09.028"
}