Complete the Return-to-Sport Picture: What Each Test Can and Cannot Tell You
A free clinical guide comparing hop tests, isokinetic dynamometry, force plates, and reaction lights.
Almost every clinic testing return to sport runs some mix of four instruments. A hop battery, an isokinetic dynamometer, a force plate, and a set of reaction lights. This guide takes them one at a time. What each measures well, what it cannot see, and what the published evidence says. No test here is treated as the wrong choice. Then it asks a different question. Your athlete passed everything you ran, so are they ready to react? Strong and symmetric is not the same as ready to react. Chmielewski et al. (IJSPT 2024) found that ACL patients improved on hop tests but improved less on visuomotor reaction tests. The standard battery does not show that difference.
What this guide covers
- 1 Every instrument one at a time. Hop and jump tests, isokinetic strength on a Biodex, force plates, and reaction lights. What each measures well, and what it cannot see.
- 2 A side-by-side comparison of all five instruments, including the row where QuickBoard comes up short. Plus the reinjury data in plain numbers.
- 3 Where a reactive station fits alongside each instrument, with CPT 97750, 97530, and 97112 billing and a clinical FAQ.
"The Quick Board is a game-changer for us. By tracking baseline data, we know if an athlete is trending in the right direction AND if they need more attention in certain areas. We use this for concussion, knee, ankle, hip, core, and shoulder rehab. One of the best pieces of technology to assist in quantifying return to play readiness."
Common questions
The guide takes the return-to-sport battery one instrument at a time: hop and jump tests, isokinetic dynamometry, force plates, and reaction lights. For each one it covers what the instrument measures well and what it cannot see, with the published evidence. It sets out six questions a return-to-sport battery has to answer, then puts all five instruments in a side-by-side comparison table, including the row where QuickBoard comes up short. It walks through Wiggins et al. (AJSM 2016), Paterno et al. (2022), Wellsandt et al. (JOSPT 2017), Simonsson et al. (BJSM 2025), Kotsifaki et al. (BJSM 2022), Undheim et al. (BJSM 2015), and Calkins et al. (IJSPT 2026), plus Chmielewski et al. (IJSPT 2024), an independent study by TRIA Orthopedic Center (which purchased QuickBoard and used it as the testing instrument) showing ACL patients improved on hop tests but improved less on visuomotor reaction tests. It also covers where a reactive station fits alongside each instrument, CPT 97750, 97530, and 97112 billing, and a clinical FAQ.
No. For jump and landing force, the force plate is the better instrument. For joint torque, the isokinetic dynamometer is. QuickBoard measures a different category: reaction time, decision speed, and bilateral symmetry under cognitive load. They are complementary, not competing. Every instrument in the guide keeps its place in the protocol, and QuickBoard adds the reactive layer at the same checkpoint. The guide is designed for ortho and sports populations returning to sport after ACL injury, not fall prevention or neuro rehabilitation. It is free and no demo is required to download it.
Get the guide. No demo required.
Enter your work email. The guide downloads immediately.
Want to see what cognitive-motor assessment adds to the testing you already run, on a real drill? It takes about five minutes.
Request a demo