Dataset Information

Evidence based prevention of hamstring injuries in sport.

ABSTRACT: A common soft tissue injury in sports involving sprinting and jumping is the hamstring strain. A major problem with hamstring strains is the high incidence of reinjury. Muscle injuries can be classified as direct or indirect and are typically grouped into three categories according to severity. A number of potential risk factors have been proposed for hamstring strains. Only a few are evidence based and some are mainly based on theoretical assumptions. There is a lack of clinical research on the effectiveness of rehabilitation programmes for hamstring strains. Although the initial treatment of rest, ice, compression, and elevation is accepted for muscle strains, no consensus exists for their rehabilitation. Not much evidence based research has been carried out on prevention of hamstring strain. To our knowledge only two prospective studies have so far been published. As the injuries are common in football and other sports involving sprinting and jumping, there is a need for further research preferably in the form of randomised controlled trials.

SUBMITTER: Petersen J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1725237 | biostudies-literature | 2005 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evidence based prevention of hamstring injuries in sport.

Petersen J J Hölmich P P

British journal of sports medicine 20050601 6

A common soft tissue injury in sports involving sprinting and jumping is the hamstring strain. A major problem with hamstring strains is the high incidence of reinjury. Muscle injuries can be classified as direct or indirect and are typically grouped into three categories according to severity. A number of potential risk factors have been proposed for hamstring strains. Only a few are evidence based and some are mainly based on theoretical assumptions. There is a lack of clinical research on the ...[more]

PMID: 15911599

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMore than half of the recurrent hamstring injuries occur within the first month after return-to-play (RTP). Although there are numerous studies on RTP, comparisons are hampered by the numerous definitions of RTP used. Moreover, there is no consensus on the criteria used to determine when a person can start playing again. These criteria need to be critically evaluated, in an attempt to reduce recurrence rates and optimize RTP.ObjectiveTo carry out a systematic review of the literature on (1) definitions of RTP used in hamstring research and (2) criteria for RTP after hamstring injuries.Study designSystematic review.MethodsSeven databases (PubMed, EMBASE/MEDLINE, CINAHL, PEDro, Cochrane, SPORTDiscus, Scopus) were searched for articles that provided a definition of, or criteria for, RTP after hamstring injury. There were no limitations on the methodological design or quality of articles. Content analysis was used to record and analyze definitions and criteria for RTP after hamstring injury.ResultsTwenty-five papers fulfilled inclusion criteria, of which 13 provided a definition of RTP and 23 described criteria to support the RTP decision. "Reaching the athlete's pre-injury level" and "being able to perform full sport activities" were the primary content categories used to define RTP. "Absence of pain", "similar strength", "similar flexibility", "medical staff clearance", and "functional performance" were core themes to describe criteria to support the RTP decision after hamstring injury.ConclusionOnly half of the included studies provided some definition of RTP after hamstring injury, of which reaching the athlete's pre-injury level and being able to perform full sport activities were the most important. A wide variety of criteria are used to support the RTP decision, none of which have been validated. More research is needed to reach a consensus on the definition of RTP and to provide validated RTP criteria to facilitate hamstring injury management and reduce hamstring injury recurrence. PROSPERO systematic review registration number: CRD42015016510.

Project description:BackgroundDespite being one of the most common sports injuries, there are no criteria-based rehabilitation programs published for acute adductor injuries.PurposeTo evaluate return-to-sport (RTS) outcomes and reinjuries after criteria-based rehabilitation for athletes with acute adductor injuries.Study designCohort study; Level of evidence, 2.MethodsMale adult athletes with an acute adductor injury underwent a supervised, standardized criteria-based exercise rehabilitation program. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to grade the injury extent from 0 (negative finding) to 3 (complete tear/avulsion). There were 3 milestones used to evaluate the RTS continuum: (1) clinically pain-free, (2) completion of controlled sports training, and (3) return to full team training. Subsequent injuries were registered within the first year.ResultsWe included 81 athletes with an acute adductor injury (MRI grade 0: n = 14; grade 1: n = 20; grade 2: n = 30; grade 3: n = 17). Of these, 61 (75%) athletes achieved RTS milestone 1, 50 (62%) achieved RTS milestone 2, and 75 (93%) achieved RTS milestone 3. There were no statistical differences in the RTS duration between MRI grade 0, 1, and 2 at any RTS milestone; thus, these were grouped together as grade 0-2. The median time (interquartile range [IQR]) for athletes with grade 0-2 injuries to become clinically pain-free was 13 days (IQR, 11-21 days), to complete controlled sports training was 17 days (IQR, 15-27 days), and to return to full team training was 18 days (IQR, 14-27 days). For athletes with a grade 3 injury, median times were 55 days (IQR, 31-75 days), 68 days (IQR, 51-84 days), and 78 days (IQR, 68-98 days), respectively. The overall 1-year reinjury rate was 8%. Athletes who achieved RTS milestone 1 had a statistically significantly lower reinjury rate than athletes who did not (5% vs 21%, respectively; ϕ = -0.233; P = .048). Athletes who achieved RTS milestone 2 had a nonstatistically significantly lower reinjury rate than athletes who did not (6% vs 13%, respectively; ϕ = -0.107; P = .366).ConclusionWe analyzed the results of a criteria-based rehabilitation protocol for athletes with acute adductor injuries. Athletes with an MRI grade 0-2 adductor injury were clinically pain-free after approximately 2 weeks and returned to full team training after approximately 3 weeks. Most athletes with an MRI grade 3 adductor injury were pain-free and returned to full team training within 3 months. Meeting the clinically pain-free criteria resulted in fewer reinjuries compared with not meeting the criteria.

Project description:OBJECTIVE: To provide a clear terminology and classification of muscle injuries in order to facilitate effective communication among medical practitioners and development of systematic treatment strategies. METHODS: Thirty native English-speaking scientists and team doctors of national and first division professional sports teams were asked to complete a questionnaire on muscle injuries to evaluate the currently used terminology of athletic muscle injury. In addition, a consensus meeting of international sports medicine experts was established to develop practical and scientific definitions of muscle injuries as well as a new and comprehensive classification system. RESULTS: The response rate of the survey was 63%. The responses confirmed the marked variability in the use of the terminology relating to muscle injury, with the most obvious inconsistencies for the term strain. In the consensus meeting, practical and systematic terms were defined and established. In addition, a new comprehensive classification system was developed, which differentiates between four types: functional muscle disorders (type 1: overexertion-related and type 2: neuromuscular muscle disorders) describing disorders without macroscopic evidence of fibre tear and structural muscle injuries (type 3: partial tears and type 4: (sub)total tears/tendinous avulsions) with macroscopic evidence of fibre tear, that is, structural damage. Subclassifications are presented for each type. CONCLUSIONS: A consistent English terminology as well as a comprehensive classification system for athletic muscle injuries which is proven in the daily practice are presented. This will help to improve clarity of communication for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes and can serve as the basis for future comparative studies to address the continued lack of systematic information on muscle injuries in the literature. WHAT ARE THE NEW THINGS: Consensus definitions of the terminology which is used in the field of muscle injuries as well as a new comprehensive classification system which clearly defines types of athletic muscle injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Expert opinion, Level V.

Dataset Information

Evidence based prevention of hamstring injuries in sport.

Publications

Evidence based prevention of hamstring injuries in sport.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets