Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34309803›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2021

Muscle Activity and Activation in Previously Strain-Injured Lower Limbs: A Systematic Review.

Joel D Presland, Ryan G Timmins, Nirav Maniar, Paul J Tofari, Dawson J Kidgell, Anthony J Shield, Jessica Dickson, David A Opar

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Joel D PreslandSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, 115 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Melbourne, VIC, 3065, Australia. Joel.presland@acu.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0715-2018
Ryan G TimminsSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, 115 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Melbourne, VIC, 3065, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4964-1848
Nirav ManiarSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, 115 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Melbourne, VIC, 3065, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6180-6003
Paul J TofariSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, 115 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Melbourne, VIC, 3065, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5498-4557
Dawson J KidgellSchool of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2271-1298
Anthony J ShieldSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0393-2466
Jessica DicksonLibrary and Academic Research Services, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
David A OparSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, 115 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Melbourne, VIC, 3065, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8354-6353
Australian Catholic University · AUMonash University · AUQueensland University of Technology · AUServices Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLower limb muscle strain injury is highly prevalent in running-based sports and is considered a risk factor for recurrent injury. It is possible that differences in muscle activity and activation in previously strain-injured limbs may contribute to the elevated risk of reinjury.

objectivesTo systematically review available literature investigating whether muscle activity and/or activation is different in previously strain-injured muscles compared to contralateral uninjured muscles or uninjured controls.

methodsA systematic review of literature in SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE Complete, CINAHL and Web of Science was conducted. Full-text English articles which compared indicators of neuromuscular function between injured and uninjured contralateral limbs or control groups in those with a history of muscle strain injury were included.

resultsTwelve studies were included in the review after eligibility criteria were applied. A best evidence synthesis revealed moderate to limited evidence suggesting differences in surface electromyography (sEMG) amplitude, integrated sEMG amplitude, inter-muscle sEMG ratios and voluntary activation in injured limbs, most often during eccentric contractions. Studies utilising sprinting assessments demonstrated conflicting evidence when comparing late swing phase biceps femoris sEMG amplitude between limbs with a history of hamstring strain injury and uninjured contralateral limbs.

conclusionsDifferences in muscle activity and activation were observed between injured and uninjured limbs across a variety of strength assessments. The evidence supporting these differences was most often moderate or limited and was generally observed during eccentric contractions. Mostly conflicting or limited evidence was found to suggest that participants with previous hamstring strain injury demonstrate no differences in muscle activity during running tasks when compared with their uninjured counterparts or contralateral limbs. TRIAL REGISTRY: PROSPERO (ID, CRD42019135681).

Indexed as

Hamstring MusclesMuscle StrengthElectromyographyHumansLower ExtremityMuscle, Skeletal

Identifiers

PMID34309803
OpenAlexW3186985560

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.