, 2008). Despite the demonstrated similarities in the properties of ACMC and IKT regarding their reliability and sensitivity, ACMC could also have some important properties that could be considered as a potential advantage of ACMC over IKT. First, although ACMC does not allow for utilization of read this the stretch shortening cycle due to its static conditions, the consecutive exertion of maximum forces of two antagonistic muscles could allow for action of a number neural networks and mechanisms generally believed to contribute in muscle excitation in cyclic movements (e.g., central pattern generator, or reciprocal inhibition (Latash, 2008)). Therefore, one could presume that the potential similarity of ACMC force pattern with a number of functional motor tasks speak in favor of ACMC��s face validity at least with respect to rapid reversal and cyclic movements.

Second, ACMC could be based on an exceptionally brief procedure for testing two antagonistic muscles than IKT, and also could require very few practice trials, if any. Third, although the individual PT was comparable in two tests, those exerted in ACMC reveal shorter duration (Figure 1). That could not only resolve the problem of both the muscle and mental fatigue associated with multiple velocities testing protocols (Zemach et al., 2009) that have been considered as a potential limitation of IKT (particularly when performed at lower angular velocities) (Dvir, 1995; Zemach et al., 2009), but also decrease the overall loading of the muscle and joint connective tissues.

Finally, although all tests within the present study were performed on an isokinetic device, note that ACMC could be performed on a much simpler and cheaper devices, including custom made kits containing a single one-axis force transducer (Suzovic et al., 2008; Bozic et al., 2011; 2012). The limitations of the present study could originate from several factors. The simple size was relatively limited not only in number, but also in graft choice (only patients with BPTB graft were included), while the population homogeneity could be questioned since the ACLR participants were recruited from different sport disciplines. Additionally, the lack of female subject could also be a limiting factor, considering the higher incidence of ACL injuries in female athletes (Myer et al., 2008; 2009).

Due to its cross-sectional design, the present study did not allow for controlling the rehabilitation progress that could have had some confounding effects on the observed outcomes. To summarize, when applied on ACLR patients, the ACMC test revealed a high within-day Cilengitide reliability as well an adequate sensitivity for discerning both between the legs and between the muscles. Although the properties of the evaluated novel test proved to be comparable with the routinely applied IKT, ACMC could still have some important methodological advantages. Among them could be a briefer and fatigue-free procedure for testing two antagonistic muscles.