Responsiveness of the Indonesian Versions of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport After Injury Score, the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form, and the Lysholm Score in Patients With ACL Injury

BACKGROUND: The Indonesian versions of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI), International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form (IKDC), and the Lysholm scores are considered valid and reliable for Indonesian-speaking patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to determine the responsiveness of the ACL-RSI, IKDC, and Lysholm scores in an Indonesian-speaking population with ACL injury. It was hypothesized that they would have good responsiveness. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Between March 1, 2021, and February 28, 2022, patients with an ACL injury at a single hospital in Indonesia were asked to complete the ACL-RSI, IKDC, and Lysholm scores before either reconstruction surgery or nonoperative treatment. At 6 months after treatment, the patients completed all 3 scores a second time, plus a global rating of change question. The distribution-based and the anchor-based methods were used to study responsiveness. For each scale, the standardized response mean, minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and minimal detectable change (MDC; at the group [MDC(gr)] and individual [MDC(ind)] levels) for each scale were determined. RESULTS: Of 80 eligible patients, 75 (93.8%) completed the study. The standardized response means for the ACL-RSI, IKDC, and Lysholm scores were 1.59, 1.72, and 1.51, respectively, indicating good responsiveness. The MCIDs for the ACL-RSI, IKDC, and Lysholm scores were 6.8, 7.8, and 4.8, respectively; all MCIDs were larger than that of the MDC(gr) (1.1, 0.7, and 0.6, respectively). At the individual level, the MCID for the IKDC was larger than the MDC(ind) (7.8 vs 5.8). However, the MCIDs for ACL-RSI and Lysholm scores were smaller than those of the MDC(ind) (6.8 vs 10.9 and 4.8 vs 5.1, respectively). CONCLUSION: The Indonesian ACL-RSI, IKDC, and Lysholm scores indicated good responsiveness and can be used in the follow-up of patients after ACL injury, especially at the group level. In individual patients, IKDC was found to be more efficient than the ACL-RSI or Lysholm scores for detecting clinically important changes over time after ACL treatment.