Factors influencing the Landing Error Scoring System: Systematic review with meta-analysis.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Systematically review the literature addressing age, sex, previous injury, and intervention program as influencing factors of the Landing Error Scoring System. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. METHODS: Three databases (PubMed, Web of Science®, and Scopus®) were searched on 1 April 2020. Original studies using the Landing Error Scoring System as primary outcome and exploring age, sex, previous injury, and intervention program were included, assessed for risk of bias, and critically appraised. Three meta-analyses were performed using one random and two mixed effect models with dependent variables: sex, previous injury and intervention program, respectively. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to evaluate the strength of the evidence. PROSPERO registration number CRD42018107210. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies were included. Pooled data indicated that females have higher Landing Error Scoring System scores than males (p<0.001, mean difference=0.6 error). Participants with previous anterior cruciate ligament injury have higher LESS scores than healthy controls (p=0.004, mean difference 1.2 error). Neuromuscular training programs lasting a minimum of six weeks and other intervention programs decrease Landing Error Scoring System scores (p<0.001, mean difference 1.2 error and p=0.042, mean difference 0.5 error, respectively). There is limited evidence suggesting that age may influence Landing Error Scoring System scores in clinically meaningful manner. Overall, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation ratings suggest very low strength of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: History of anterior cruciate ligament injury and undertaking neuromuscular training for a minimum of six weeks meaningfully altered Landing Error Scoring System scores. These findings, however, should be interpreted cautiously considering the very low Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation rating of the evidence.