Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33997081›Full record

ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2021

Systematic Review of Outcome Measures Used After Proximal Hamstring Repair.

Tara Reza, Andrew J Hinkle, Andre Perez-Chaumont, Symone M Brown, Mary K Mulcahey

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Proximal avulsion of the hamstring in young athlete patients: a case series and review of literature.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Tara RezaSchool of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Andrew J HinkleSchool of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Andre Perez-ChaumontSchool of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Symone M BrownDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Mary K MulcaheyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Tulane University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient-reported outcome measures are important to determine outcomes after orthopaedic procedures. There is currently no standard for outcome measures in the evaluation of patient outcomes after proximal hamstring repair. PURPOSE: To identify and evaluate outcome measures used after proximal hamstring repair. STUDY

designSystematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

methodsA systematic review was performed to identify all English-language articles assessing outcomes after proximal hamstring repair in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, MEDLINE via OvidSP, and Web of Science between 2000 and 2019. After duplicates were removed, studies were selected using eligibility criteria established by the authors. Image reviews, anatomic/histology studies, literature reviews, surgical technique reports, systematic reviews, narrative reviews, case studies, and studies with <5 patients were excluded. Extraction, synthesis, and analysis of outcome measure data were performed using Microsoft Excel. Quality assessment of included studies was performed using Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria.

resultsAfter duplicate articles were removed, a total of 304 unique articles were identified and 27 met the inclusion criteria. The mean number of patients with proximal hamstring repairs per study was 40. The most frequently reported outcome measures were return to sport (14/27; 51.9%), custom survey/questionnaire (13/27; 48.1%), and isokinetic hamstring strength testing (13/27; 48.1%). Six of the 10 most commonly used outcome measures were validated and included Lower Extremity Functional Scale, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey, visual analog scale for pain, Perth Hamstring Assessment Tool (PHAT), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and Tegner Activity Scale. Of those, PHAT was the only validated outcome measure designed for proximal hamstring repair.

conclusionThere is currently no consensus on the best outcome measurements for the evaluation of patients after proximal hamstring repair. We recommend an increased commitment to the use of return to sport, isokinetic strength testing, Lower Extremity Functional Scale, and PHAT when assessing such injuries. Future studies should aim to define the most reliable methods of outcome measurement in this patient population through consistent use of tools that are clinically relevant and important to patients and can easily be employed in a variety of clinical scenarios.

Indexed as

hamstringoutcome measuresproximal hamstring injuryproximal hamstring repair

Identifiers

PMID33997081
PMCPMC8113800
OpenAlexW3162997226

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.