Knee arthroscopy / meniscus recovery data

Operation studied

Population-wide comparison of two arthroscopic techniques: arthroscopic partial resection (APR — trimming out the torn part of the meniscus) and arthroscopic repair (AR — stitching the tear back together).

Reported at

Annual procedure counts and rates, 2010-2020 (11-year national registry period).

What it reports

• Between 2010 and 2020, Norway's national patient registry recorded 119,528 knee arthroscopy procedures for meniscal injury; 107,117 (89.6%) were arthroscopic partial resection (APR, trimming out the torn meniscus) and 12,411 were arthroscopic repair (AR, stitching the tear).
• The number of APR procedures performed nationally fell from 14,474 in 2010 to 4,423 in 2020 (Table 2); the authors describe this as a 72% decrease.
• The number of AR procedures performed nationally rose from 615 in 2010 to 1,709 in 2020 (Table 2); the authors describe this as a 178% increase.
• The national rate of APR fell from 298 to 82 procedures per 100,000 people per year (p < 0.001).
• The national rate of AR rose from 13 procedures per 100,000 people per year in 2010 to a peak of 32 per 100,000 in 2019 (p < 0.001).
• The ratio of APR procedures to AR procedures fell from 22-to-1 in 2010 to below 5-to-1 by 2020 at the national level; the APR/AR trend curves showed a statistically significant decrease (p < 0.001).
• Of all APR procedures, public hospitals performed 66.4% (71,182) and private clinics performed 33.6% (35,935); of all AR procedures, public hospitals performed 89.3% (11,091) and private clinics performed 10.7% (1,320).
• In private institutions specifically, the APR-to-AR ratio rose from 75 in 2010 to 110 in 2013, then dropped sharply between 2013 and 2014, ending close to the national and public-sector ratio by 2020.
• Every age group (0-19, 20-39, 40-59, 60+) showed a significant fall in APR rate and rise in AR rate (p < 0.001); the rise in AR was especially marked for patients aged 20-59, and patients aged 60+ had close to a 75% reduction in APR.
• Men were operated on more often than women (p < 0.001), and men aged 40-59 had more meniscal surgeries than any other age/gender group. Combining APR and AR together, both sexes showed a significant downward trend in overall surgery rate over the decade, except women aged 0-19, whose rate did not change significantly (p = 0.45).
• Public institutions performed about twice as many APR procedures as private institutions, and about nine times as many AR procedures (both p < 0.001).
• Comparing each region's own yearly trend to the national average yearly trend (Table 3): the yearly APR rate-of-change ratio (IRR/year — a value below 1 means the rate fell that year) was 0.848 for Southern-Eastern Norway (95% CI 0.845-0.851, p<0.001), 0.912 for Western Norway (95% CI 0.907-0.917, p<0.001), 0.864 for Central Norway (95% CI 0.858-0.869, p=0.463, not significant), 0.874 for Northern Norway (95% CI 0.866-0.881, p=0.026), and 0.866 nationally (95% CI 0.864-0.868). For AR, the yearly rate-of-change ratio was 1.122 for Southern-Eastern Norway (95% CI 1.113-1.131, p<0.001), 1.120 for Western Norway (95% CI 1.105-1.135, p=0.004), 1.050 for Central Norway (95% CI 1.032-1.069, p<0.001), 1.011 for Northern Norway (95% CI 0.981-1.043, p<0.001), and 1.100 nationally (95% CI 1.094-1.108).
• Separately in the text (not the Table 3 comparison above), the authors state that Northern Norway 'failed to demonstrate a statistically significant increase of AR' in its own regional trend (p = 0.47) — this is a different statistical test, looking at whether that region's own AR rate changed significantly over time, rather than comparing its yearly change to the national average.

What it does not report

This is a national registry study of procedure counts and rates, not of individual patients: it reports no pain scores, function scores, complication rates, or revision/reoperation rates. · It does not report return to sport, return to work, driving, or recovery time for individual patients. · It does not distinguish degenerative from traumatic meniscal tears in its counts, and does not classify tear type (e.g. root tears, ramp lesions) — the authors state this explicitly as a limitation. · It does not track individual patients over time; each arthroscopy is counted once as an annual national/regional total, not as a followed case.

Read the paper → · checked 2026-08-10

Operation studied

Survey of written rehabilitation protocols covering three procedures: partial meniscectomy, meniscus repair, and meniscus replacement (meniscus transplant/implant)

Reported at

protocols were scored at postop day 3, postop day 7, then weekly until full weight bearing and full range of motion were reached; the surveyed protocols cover the early rehab period up to 12 weeks

What it reports

• This study compared the written rehab instructions used by 62 orthopedic clinics in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland after meniscus surgery, across three operations: trimming a torn meniscus (partial meniscectomy, 15 protocols), stitching a tear back together (meniscus repair, 54 protocols), and meniscus replacement or transplant (7 protocols).
• After partial meniscectomy, protocols allowed full weight on the leg at a mean of 0.6 weeks after surgery (about 4 days), with every protocol allowing full weight bearing within the first two postoperative weeks.
• After partial meniscectomy, every protocol reviewed allowed full knee bending and straightening (range of motion) immediately after surgery, with no restriction.
• No protocol recommended a knee brace after partial meniscectomy.
• After partial meniscectomy, most protocols recommended a motion machine (continuous active or passive motion, CAM/CPM) for a mean of 3.8 weeks (SD 1.9 weeks).
• After partial meniscectomy, basic rehab exercises such as stationary cycling, pool walking, or general strength work were recommended to start at a mean of 3.2 weeks (SD 1.0 weeks).
• After partial meniscectomy, 'specific training' — defined by the paper as roadwork, coordination, and proprioception work, plus sport-specific drills — was recommended to start at a mean of 7.3 weeks (SD 2.6 weeks). The paper does not use the word 'running.'
• After meniscus repair, full weight bearing was recommended at a mean of 3.9 weeks (SD 2.1 weeks), with all 54 protocols agreeing on full weight bearing by 6 weeks.
• After meniscus repair, free range of motion was recommended at a mean of 5.0 weeks (SD 1.6 weeks), with all protocols agreeing on free motion by 6 weeks.
• After meniscus repair, just under half of protocols (48.1%) used a knee brace, for a mean of 5.9 weeks (SD 0.7 weeks).
• After meniscus repair, only 4 of 54 protocols (7.4%) used a passive motion machine (CPM), and only in the first week; most instead used an active/passive motion machine (CAM/CPM) for a mean of 6.4 weeks (SD 1.9 weeks).
• After meniscus repair, basic rehab exercises started at a mean of 5.6 weeks (SD 1.5 weeks), and sport-specific training started much later, at a mean of 14.6 weeks (SD 5.4 weeks).
• After meniscus replacement, full weight bearing was recommended at a mean of 6.3 weeks (SD 2.1 weeks), with all 7 protocols agreeing on full weight bearing by 10 weeks.
• After meniscus replacement, full range of motion was recommended at a mean of 7.1 weeks (SD 1.1 weeks), with all protocols agreeing by 9 weeks.
• After meniscus replacement, all 7 protocols recommended a knee brace, and every one specified exactly 8 weeks of use (SD 0.00 — no variation across protocols).
• After meniscus replacement, 3 of 7 protocols (42.9%) used a passive motion machine (CPM), limited to the first week; most protocols used an active/passive motion machine (CAM/CPM) for a mean of 7.1 weeks (SD 1.1 weeks).
• After meniscus replacement, sport-specific training was not recommended to start before 6 months after surgery.
• Across every measure, recovery milestones came earliest after partial meniscectomy, later after repair, and latest after meniscus replacement — differences the paper reports as statistically significant (p<0.001 for most comparisons; p=0.009 for free range of motion, repair vs. replacement).

What it does not report

Actual patient outcomes (pain, function, satisfaction, complication or failure rates) — this paper reports what protocols recommend, not what happened to patients. · A definitive return-to-running date. The closest reported figure, 'specific training,' is defined as roadwork, coordination, and proprioception work plus sport-specific drills — not running specifically. · A distinct 'full sport return' timepoint, for any of the three procedures — the paper reports only when sport-specific training starts, not when it's judged complete. · Return to work, driving, or sleep. · A response rate, or how many institutions were contacted versus how many of the 62 responded. · Any minimum-maximum range for a timing figure — only means and standard deviations are reported throughout. · Any validated pain or function outcome scale (e.g. VAS, KOOS, IKDC, Lysholm) — none is used in this protocol survey.

Read the paper → · checked 2026-08-10

Measures

Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) — average pain, pain at rest, pain at movement (0-10, higher = worse) · Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) — patient satisfaction (0-10, higher = better)

Reported at

before discharge, POD1, POD2, POD3, POD4, POD7, POD14, POD28 (pain); POD7 (satisfaction, whole-cohort only)

Follow-up

28 days

What it reports

• This paper followed 191 people who had one of four kinds of day surgery — hemorrhoid surgery, inguinal hernia repair, knee arthroscopy, or shoulder arthroscopy — and reported pain separately for each group; 49 people had knee arthroscopy, and 48 of them have complete pain-score data.
• Right before leaving hospital after knee arthroscopy, typical pain was 3 out of 10, with the middle half of patients scoring between 1 and 4.
• One day after knee arthroscopy, typical pain was 2 out of 10, with the middle half of patients between 1 and 4.
• Two days after knee arthroscopy, typical pain was 2 out of 10, with the middle half between 1 and 3.
• Three days after knee arthroscopy, typical pain was 2 out of 10, with the middle half between 1 and 2.5.
• Four days after knee arthroscopy, typical pain was 1 out of 10, with the middle half between 0.75 and 3.25.
• One week after knee arthroscopy (day 7), typical pain was 2 out of 10, with the middle half of patients scoring between 1 and 4.
• Two weeks after knee arthroscopy, typical pain was 1 out of 10, with the middle half between 1 and 2.
• Four weeks after knee arthroscopy, typical pain was 1 out of 10, with the middle half between 0 and 2.
• Pain rated above 3 out of 10 (called 'moderate' in the paper) was reported by 27.0% of knee arthroscopy patients before discharge, 14.5% on day 1, 12.5% on day 2, 8.3% on day 3, 16.6% on day 4, 16.6% on day 7, and 4.1% on both day 14 and day 28.
• Pain rated above 5 out of 10 (called 'severe' in the paper) was reported by 10.4% of knee arthroscopy patients before discharge, 6.2% on day 1, 2.0% on day 2, 0% on day 3, 4.1% on day 4, 6.2% on day 7, 0% on day 14, and 4.1% on day 28.
• Across the whole study (all 191 patients, not broken out by surgery type), 24.61% of people did not take their prescribed pain medication exactly as instructed over the first 4 days; the most common reasons given were side effects like nausea or tiredness, or simply not having enough pain to need it.
• Also across the whole study, patients who took their pain medication as prescribed rated their day-7 satisfaction higher (typical score 9 out of 10) than patients who skipped or changed the schedule (typical score 8 out of 10).

What it does not report

Return to work · Return to sport or driving after surgery · Any pain or recovery data beyond the 28-day follow-up window

Read the paper → · checked 2026-08-10

Operation studied

Arthroscopic isolated meniscectomy (partial or complete meniscus removal). The paper does not compare surgical variants — it compares two POST-OP REHAB approaches after that surgery: a home-based exercise program (HBP) vs standard inpatient and/or outpatient supervised physical therapy (IOP).

Measures

Lysholm score (0-100, higher = better) · Subjective IKDC score (International Knee Documentation Committee) (0-100, higher = better) · Knee flexion (degrees, higher = better) · Knee extension (degrees, higher = better) · Thigh girth (centimeters, higher = better) · Single-leg (horizontal) hop test (centimeters, higher = better) · Vertical hop test (centimeters, higher = better) · Time to return to work (days, higher = worse)

Reported at

short-term (28 days to 3 months; individual studies picked the timepoint closest to 6 weeks), midterm (6 months, Lysholm score only)

Follow-up

Follow-up length across the 8 pooled trials ranged from 28 days to 6 months.

What it reports

• This review pooled 8 randomized trials with 434 people total (209 given a home-based exercise program, 225 given supervised in-person physical therapy) after arthroscopic isolated meniscectomy, published between 1982 and 2019. Ages ranged 21 to 74; 332 were men and 104 were women.
• Pooling 5 studies, knee function (Lysholm score, 0-100, higher is better) was 8.64 points better in the supervised in-person group than the home-program group in the short term (28 days to 3 months): mean difference -8.64 points (95% CI, -15.14 to -2.13; P = .02). The largest difference in any single pooled study was 15.8 points.
• That short-term Lysholm result did not hold up: when the analysis was repeated leaving out one study that only reported data as a published abstract in tabular form, the difference disappeared (no statistically significant difference).
• At 6 months, pooling 2 studies, there was no significant difference in Lysholm score between the two rehab approaches: mean difference -4.78 points (95% CI, -9.98 to 0.42; P = .07). The largest difference in either pooled study was 5.67 points.
• Subjective IKDC score (0-100, higher is better), pooled from 5 studies at short term (1 month to 6 weeks), showed no significant difference between groups: mean difference -6.73 points (95% CI, -38.15 to 24.69; P = .22). The largest difference in any single pooled study was 9.6 points.
• Knee bending range (flexion), pooled from 4 studies at short term, showed no significant difference between groups: mean difference -7.40 degrees (95% CI, -15.12 to 0.32; P = .055). The largest difference in any single pooled study was 12.2 degrees.
• Knee straightening range (extension), pooled from 2 studies at short term, showed no significant difference between groups: mean difference 0.55 degrees (95% CI, -0.07 to 1.18; P = .08). The largest difference in either pooled study was 0.9 degrees.
• Thigh muscle girth (a proxy for muscle wasting), pooled from 3 studies at short term, was larger in the home-program group: mean difference 1.38 cm (95% CI, 0.27 to 2.48; P = .01). The largest difference in any single pooled study was 1.9 cm.
• A single-leg hop distance test, pooled from 2 studies at short term (28 to 50 days), showed no significant difference between groups: mean difference -13.88 cm (95% CI, -30.23 to 2.47; P = .10). The largest difference in either pooled study was 19.1 cm.
• A vertical hop test, pooled from 2 studies at short term (28 to 50 days), was better in the supervised in-person group: mean difference -3.25 cm (95% CI, -6.20 to -0.29; P = .03). The largest difference in either pooled study was 3.47 cm.
• Time to return to work, pooled from 2 studies, showed no significant difference between the two rehab approaches: mean difference 4.53 days (95% CI, -0.39 to 9.44; P = .07). The largest difference in either pooled study was 12.6 days.
• Two individual trials inside the review reported their own return-to-work gap between groups (not pooled, and the paper's table does not print an absolute number of days for either group on its own, only the gap between the two rehab arms): Forster and Frost (1982) found a 4-day gap favoring the home program; Goodwin et al (2003) found a 12.6-day gap favoring the home program.
• Risk-of-bias review found 'some concerns' in 4 of the 8 included studies and 'high risk of bias' in the other 4. Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) was rated low to very low across all reported outcomes.

What it does not report

A pain scale (e.g. VAS or NRS) — the paper reports only composite knee-function/symptom scores (Lysholm, IKDC), not a standalone pain score. · Absolute (non-comparative) average scores or days for either rehab group on its own — nearly every figure reported is the DIFFERENCE between the home-based and supervised groups, not what either group's actual average score or return-to-work day count was. · Driving — mentioned only once, in the Discussion, as a general rationale for why home-based rehab helps people without easy transport to a clinic. No driving outcome was measured or reported as a result. · Return to sport as a measured outcome — mentioned only in the Discussion as background context (citing other work), not as data this review collected or pooled. · Sleep — not mentioned anywhere in the paper. · Weekly pain or function values over time — the paper reports only two fixed windows (short-term and midterm/6-month), not week-by-week tracking.

Read the paper → · checked 2026-08-10

Operation studied

Standard arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (procedure code NGD 11) for degenerative medial meniscus tear, done at St Olav University Hospital and Teres Rosenborg Clinic, Trondheim, Norway. After surgery, patients were randomized to high-repetition medical exercise therapy (3x/week for 12 weeks) or no formal rehabilitation.

Measures

VAS (pain, at rest) (paper's Methods section states 0-100 mm; the numbers printed in its results table are on an unlabeled ~0-10 range with no unit given — see note below, higher = worse) · KOOS (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, composite of pain/symptoms/ADL/sport-recreation/QOL) (0-100, paper states 100 = no knee-related problems. Note: the paper's own Methods section defines higher KOOS as better, but its Results describe a score DECREASE as the favorable outcome for the exercise group — a contradiction inside the paper itself, not resolved here., higher = better) · Five repetition maximum (5RM) quadriceps strength test, leg extension bench (no fixed range or unit given in the text, higher = better)

Reported at

preop (pretest), 1 month postop, 3 months postop (12 weeks, post-test)

Follow-up

3 months (12 weeks) postoperatively — trial does not follow patients past this point

What it reports

• Before surgery, pain (VAS) measured 3.3 (SD 2.1) in the exercise group and 2.9 (SD 1.5) in the control group.
• By 3 months after surgery, pain had fallen to 1.4 (SD 1.4) in the exercise group and 2.3 (SD 1.3) in the control group — a within-group drop of 1.9 in the exercise group versus 0.6 in the control group, with an adjusted between-group difference of -1.1 (95% CI -1.5 to -0.6, p<0.01) favoring the exercise group.
• Quadriceps strength (5RM test) rose from 11.6 (SD 4.3) to 20.2 (SD 5.4) in the exercise group and from 12.5 (SD 5.2) to 14.5 (SD 5.2) in the control group by 3 months — a gain of 8.6 versus 2.0, adjusted difference 6.5 (95% CI 5.0 to 8.0, p<0.01) favoring the exercise group.
• Knee function/symptom score (KOOS) moved from 48.0 (SD 21.7) to 30.0 (SD 17.7) in the exercise group and from 43.4 (SD 22.9) to 36.9 (SD 23.1) in the control group by 3 months — a within-group change of -18.0 versus -6.5, adjusted difference -10.7 (95% CI -14.7 to -6.7, p<0.01). The paper's own Discussion calls the larger drop in the exercise group 'both a statistically and a clinical difference' in that group's favor, even though its Methods section defines a higher KOOS score (100) as fewer problems — the paper does not reconcile this itself.
• 5 of 70 participants (7%) dropped out during the treatment period.
• The exercise group completed 82% of the prescribed rehabilitation program on average.
• At both 1 month and 3 months after surgery, the exercise group had significantly less pain and significantly better knee function than the control group (p<0.05); by 3 months the difference reached p<0.01 for pain, strength, and knee function.
• Twelve weeks after surgery, both groups scored significantly better on pain and knee function than they had at 1 month (p<0.05), but the paper does not print the numeric 1-month VAS or KOOS values, only this comparison.
• Study group: average age 46.3 years (SD 8.6), 23 of 70 (33%) women, average symptom duration before surgery 2.1 years (SD 2.0).
• During the same surgery, 25 of 70 patients also had chondral (cartilage) lesions; 12 (48%) of those were unstable flaps treated by shaver debridement, and 92% of those debridements were on the medial (inner) side of the knee.

What it does not report

Return to work, employment status, or job type — not mentioned anywhere in the paper's text. · Driving. · Sleep. · Sport/recreation as a standalone result — it is only one of five components folded into the single composite KOOS number; no separate sport-and-recreation subscore is printed. · Weekly or day-by-day pain values — only baseline (pretest) and 3-month (post-test) numbers appear in the results table; 1-month values were collected but not printed. · Anything beyond 3 months postoperatively — the trial's follow-up ends at 12 weeks.

Read the paper → · checked 2026-08-10

Operation studied

Partial meniscectomy by knee arthroscopy, comparing a needle-arthroscopy technique (1.9 mm NanoScope, no skin incisions) against standard arthroscopy (anterolateral/anteromedial portal incisions). Meniscus repairs, root repairs, and cases with associated ligament injuries were excluded. 17 of 19 patients in each group (89%) had a medial meniscus tear of the posterior horn.

Measures

VAS pain (0-10 (paper reports VAS pain values consistent with this convention; the numeric endpoints are not spelled out in the text itself), higher = worse) · KOOS (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) — Pain, Symptoms/Stiffness, Activities of Daily Living, Sport/Recreation, Quality of Life subscales (0-100% (standard KOOS convention; the paper reports scores as percentages but does not itself state that 100 = best), higher = better)

Reported at

preop, 24 hr post-op (opioid use only), 2 wk, 6 wk

Follow-up

6 weeks. All 38 patients had data at 2 weeks; at 6 weeks, 15 of 19 (79%) needle-arthroscopy patients and 14 of 19 (74%) standard-arthroscopy patients had data available.

What it reports

• Before surgery, pain averaged 6.1 out of 10 in both groups (needle arthroscopy 6.1 ± 1.7, standard arthroscopy 6.1 ± 1.8, 19 patients each) — the two groups started with the same amount of pain.
• At 2 weeks after surgery, pain was lower in the needle-arthroscopy group: 1.0 out of 10, versus 2.6 out of 10 in the standard-arthroscopy group.
• By 6 weeks after surgery, pain was about the same in both groups: 0.4 out of 10 with needle arthroscopy versus 0.7 out of 10 with standard arthroscopy.
• In the first 24 hours after surgery, needle-arthroscopy patients used less opioid pain medicine than standard-arthroscopy patients (1.2 vs 2.4 morphine milligram equivalents).
• At 2 weeks, function and quality-of-life scores (KOOS) were higher in the needle-arthroscopy group across every subscale measured — for example KOOS pain 79% vs 58%, and quality of life 70% vs 43%.
• By 6 weeks, KOOS scores had converged and were similar between groups (for example KOOS pain 82% vs 78%, quality of life 72% vs 68%).
• One patient in the standard-arthroscopy group (1 of 19, about 5%) developed a deep vein thrombosis (a blood clot) two weeks after surgery. No other complications were recorded in either group.
• The amount of fluid used during surgery was much higher with standard arthroscopy than needle arthroscopy (1.4 vs 0.5 liters), though the tourniquet time on the leg was about the same (20 vs 16 minutes).

What it does not report

Return to work timing. · Return to sport timing. · Driving. · Sleep. · Any outcome beyond 6 weeks after surgery — the study did not follow patients past that point.

Read the paper → · checked 2026-08-10

Operation studied

arthroscopic partial meniscectomy

Measures

KOOS-sports (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Sport and Recreation subscale) (0-100%, higher = better) · Quadriceps strength index (hand-held dynamometer or isokinetic testing, % of uninjured leg) (0-100%, higher = better) · Hamstring / glute med / glute max strength index (% of uninjured leg) (0-100%, higher = better) · Single leg hop test (% of uninjured leg) (0-100%, higher = better)

Reported at

Phase I: day 0-7. Phase II: day 8 - week 2. Phase III: week 2-8. Phase IV: week 9-12.

Follow-up

Protocol runs from post-op day 0 to unrestricted return to sport at 9-12 weeks. Phase IV is described as the last stage with no further discharge criteria, so the protocol does not track anything past that point.

What it reports

• In the first week after surgery (Phase I), the goals are to reduce swelling and pain, restore knee range of motion, and get the quad muscle firing again; walking is allowed with crutches, bearing as much weight as tolerated.
• Crutches can be stopped within the first few days once swelling has gone down, the patient can do a straight leg raise with good quad control, and their walking pattern looks right, at the physical therapist's judgment.
• To move on from Phase I, the knee needs to bend from 0 to 90 degrees, and the patient needs to be able to do a straight leg raise with good quad activation.
• Phase II runs from day 8 to week 2. Goals are full pain-free motion, better strength and endurance, a gradual return to normal activities, walking normally without crutches, and better balance.
• To move on from Phase II, the knee needs full pain-free motion, no swelling (checked with the Modified Stroke Test), and a normal, non-limping walk without any walking aid.
• Phase III runs from 2 to 8 weeks after surgery, with full weight bearing throughout. Goals are to keep full pain-free motion, build strength and endurance, avoid pain or swelling after exercise, and move with good form.
• From 4 to 6 weeks after surgery, cardio work such as the elliptical, stair climber, flutter-kick swimming, or pool jogging is added, as tolerated.
• Once the surgical leg's quad strength reaches more than 80% of the other leg's (by hand-held or isokinetic dynamometer), the patient can start an interval running program and progress to jump and agility training.
• Before returning to any impact activity, the protocol asks for: 10 single-leg squats with good form through at least 60 degrees of knee bend, a controlled single-leg drop jump, finishing the jog/run program pain- and swelling-free, quad strength over 80% of the other leg, hamstring/glute strength at least 80% of the other leg, and a single-leg hop test at least 75% of the other leg.
• Phase IV, unrestricted return to sport, runs from 9 to 12 weeks after surgery.
• To be cleared for unrestricted return to sport, the protocol requires quad strength over 95% of the other leg, hamstring/glute strength at least 95%, a single-leg hop test at least 95% of the other leg with good landing control, and a KOOS-sports questionnaire score above 90% (or another patient-reported outcome measure).
• The protocol lists no discharge criteria beyond Phase IV; it is described as the last stage.

What it does not report

Actual pain scores over time on any numeric scale (e.g. 0-10) — the protocol names 'minimize pain' as a goal but never reports a measured pain value at any point. · Return to work timing. · Return to driving timing. · Sleep. · A single fixed return-to-sport date — the protocol gives a 9-12 week window gated by strength/hop-test criteria, not a fixed day. · Any measured outcome data from an actual patient cohort — this is a treatment protocol for clinicians, not a study reporting results from treated patients, so there is no sample, no measured before/after values, and no statistics.

Read the paper → · checked 2026-08-10

Operation studied

Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, meniscus repair (stable vertical tears, complex vertical tears, complete oblique/radial tears, horizontal lesions, ramp lesions, root tears), and meniscus reconstruction (allograft transplantation or scaffold)

Reported at

meniscectomy: 4-12 wk; meniscus repair: minimum 4 mo (vertical tears) up to 6-9 mo (complex, radial, root and horizontal tears); meniscus reconstruction: 6 wk non-weight-bearing, full weight-bearing progression after 8 wk, at least 9 mo total rehab, return to sport at least 12 mo

What it reports

• This is not a study of patients - it is a formal consensus of 67 experts (26 in a steering group, 41 in a rating group: orthopaedic surgeons, sports medicine doctors and physiotherapists) from the US and 13 European countries, agreeing on how rehab after meniscus surgery should be run.
• The panel screened 395 papers and produced 29 recommendations across 19 questions, but graded the underlying evidence weak: only 1 recommendation got the top evidence grade (A), 2 got grade B, 9 got grade C, and 17 - the majority - got the lowest grade, D.
• Despite the weak evidence, the panel agreed strongly with the recommendations themselves: on a 1-to-9 scale, the mean of the median ratings across all 19 questions was 8.2/9, and the global mean rating across all statements was 8.4 +/- 0.2.
• After meniscectomy (partial removal of torn meniscus), rehab should be guided by milestones the person hits - swelling down, motion back, strength returned - rather than a fixed calendar, and typically runs 4 to 12 weeks.
• After a meniscus repair for a stable vertical tear, deep squatting and jumping should be avoided for a minimum of 4 months.
• After repair of a complex, radial, root, or horizontal tear, recovery runs longer - 6 to 9 months - with knee bending kept under 30 degrees for weeks 4 to 8, under 45 degrees through week 12, and progressed up to 60-90 degrees by weeks 13 to 16.
• After meniscus reconstruction (transplant or scaffold), the leg is kept non-weight-bearing for 6 weeks, weight is added gradually after 8 weeks, total rehab takes at least 9 months, and return to sport takes at least 12 months.
• Before returning to activity, quadriceps (thigh muscle) strength should reach at least 80% of the strength in the uninjured leg.
• The panel found no good evidence on whether to use a knee brace after meniscus reconstruction, so it made no recommendation either way.

What it does not report

Pain scores (VAS/NRS) are not reported anywhere in this document. · Return to sport data is explicitly deferred to a planned Part II article, not covered here: "return to sports... will be presented in a part II article." · Patient-reported outcome measures (e.g. Lysholm, KOOS, IKDC) are likewise deferred to Part II, not reported as results here. · Return to work, driving, and sleep are not addressed in this document. · Prevention programmes and non-operative treatment of tears are deferred to Part II, not covered here.

Read the paper → · checked 2026-08-10