COMPARISON OF INTER-SESSION, INTRA-RATER AND INTER-RATER RELIABILITY OF SINGLE AND DOUBLE LEG LANDING ERROR SCORING SYSTEM USING DIFFERENT CALCULATION METHODS

Abstract

INTRODUCTION & AIMS The Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) is used for screening noncontact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk. The LESS is deemed a valid and reliable indicator of landing biomechanics that predict noncontact ACL injuries. We have sought to validate a Single-Leg Landing Error Scoring System (SLESS) against the established LESS. There are seven distinct calculation methods for final LESS scores, adding variability to the original version and the risk of misinterpreting results. This study used different calculation methods to investigate the inter-session, intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the SLESS and LESS scores. METHODS Thirty-five team sports players performed four drop jump landing variations (dominant leg, non-dominant leg, double-leg and cognitive loading drill with double-leg) over three sessions. Sessions 1 and 2 were conducted on the same day, with Session 3 a week later. Video footage from frontal and sagittal views captured all landings. Three professionals scored recorded trials using standard SLESS and LESS protocols. One scorer assessed intra-session and inter-session reliability, while three evaluated inter-rater reliability. The final SLESS and LESS scores were calculated using original version/OG, average of 3 trials-AV, worst trial/WT, best score/BS, first trial/FT, last trial/LT, error present in at least two of three trials/TT). Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and coefficient of variation (CV) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS The study observed acceptable inter-session reliability across single-leg and double-leg drop jump landing tasks using all seven calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.80-0.91, SEM=1.07-1.10, CV=6.5-10.1%; LESS: ICC=0.63-0.90, SEM=1.06-1.11, CV=5.7-11.5%). The study also demonstrated acceptable intra-rater reliability for all tasks using all calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.86-0.94, SEM=1.05-1.08, CV=5.0-8.5%; LESS: ICC=0.74-0.93, SEM=1.04-1.08, CV=4.2-8.5%). In addition, acceptable inter-rater reliability was shown for all tasks using all calculation methods (SLESS: ICC=0.69-0.83, SEM=1.11-1.18, CV=10.5-18.0%; LESS: ICC=0.54-0.82, SEM=1.10-1.20, CV=10.3-20.3%). CONCLUSION The study indicates the reliability of all seven calculation methods for SLESS and LESS scores. Precise specification of the chosen calculation method is crucial for practitioners and researchers.