Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28035586›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2017

Criteria for Progressing Rehabilitation and Determining Return-to-Play Clearance Following Hamstring Strain Injury: A Systematic Review.

Jack T Hickey, Ryan G Timmins, Nirav Maniar, Morgan D Williams, David A Opar

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Prevention and Rehabilitation of the Athletic Hamstring Injury.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Traumatic muscle injury.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Hamstring Strain Injury Rehabilitation.Journal of athletic training · 2022
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jack T HickeySchool of Exercise Science, Australian Catholic University, 115 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Melbourne, VIC, 3065, Australia. jack.hickey@acu.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2764-698X
Ryan G TimminsSchool of Exercise Science, Australian Catholic University, 115 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Melbourne, VIC, 3065, Australia.
Nirav ManiarSchool of Exercise Science, Australian Catholic University, 115 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Melbourne, VIC, 3065, Australia.
Morgan D WilliamsSchool of Health, Sport and Professional Practice, University of South Wales, Pontypridd, Wales, UK.
David A OparSchool of Exercise Science, Australian Catholic University, 115 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Melbourne, VIC, 3065, Australia.
Australian Catholic University · AUUniversity of South Wales · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRehabilitation progression and return-to-play (RTP) decision making following hamstring strain injury (HSI) can be challenging for clinicians, owing to the competing demands of reducing both convalescence and the risk of re-injury. Despite an increased focus on the RTP process following HSI, little attention has been paid to rehabilitation progression and RTP criteria, and subsequent time taken to RTP and re-injury rates.

objectiveThe aim of this systematic review is to identify rehabilitation progression and RTP criteria implemented following HSI and examine the subsequent time taken to RTP and rates of re-injury.

methodsA systematic literature review of databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and EMBASE was conducted to identify studies of participants with acute HSI reporting time taken to RTP and rates of re-injury after a minimum 6-month follow-up. General guidelines and specific criteria for rehabilitation progression were identified for each study. In addition, RTP criteria were identified and categorised as performance tests, clinical assessments, isokinetic dynamometry or the Askling H-test.

resultsNine studies were included with a total of 601 acute HSI confirmed by clinical examination or magnetic resonance imaging within 10 days of initial injury. A feature across all nine studies was that the injured individual's perception of pain was used to guide rehabilitation progression, whilst clinical assessments and performance tests were the most frequently implemented RTP criteria. Mean RTP times were lowest in studies implementing isokinetic dynamometry as part of RTP decision making (12-25 days), whilst those implementing the Askling H-test had the lowest rates of re-injury (1.3-3.6%).

conclusionsThis systematic review highlights the strong emphasis placed on the alleviation of pain to allow HSI rehabilitation progression, and the reliance on subjective clinical assessments and performance tests as RTP criteria. These results suggest a need for more objective and clinically practical criteria, allowing a more evidence-based approach to rehabilitation progression, and potentially reducing the ambiguity involved in the RTP decision-making process.

Indexed as

Return to SportAthletic InjuriesDecision MakingHamstring MusclesHumansLeg InjuriesMagnetic Resonance ImagingRecovery of FunctionSprains and StrainsTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID28035586
OpenAlexW2566013054

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.