Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35403955›Full record

ArticleSports medicine - open2022

Proximal Hamstring Tendon Avulsions: A Survey of Orthopaedic Surgeons' Current Practices in the Nordic Countries.

Sofia Laszlo, Martin Nilsson, Elsa Pihl, Ville M Mattila, Jörg Schilcher, Olof Sköldenberg, Frede Frihagen, Kenneth B Jonsson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sports medicine - open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Sofia LaszloDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Martin NilssonDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Östersund Hospital, Östersund, Sweden.
Elsa PihlKarolinska Institutet, Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Unit of Orthopaedics, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ville M MattilaDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Tampere University and University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
Jörg SchilcherDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Olof SköldenbergKarolinska Institutet, Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Unit of Orthopaedics, Stockholm, Sweden.
Frede FrihagenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Østfold Hospital Trust, Grålum, Norway.
Kenneth B JonssonDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden. kenneth.jonsson@surgsci.uu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2268-8008

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeEvidence guiding the decision on whether to treat proximal hamstring tendon avulsions (PHA) operatively or non-operatively is very limited. The aim of this study was to identify the current practices and the rationale behind PHA treatment decisions in the Nordic countries.

methodsA survey was sent to orthopaedic surgeons in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark. The study population consisted of responding surgeons with exposure to surgical treatment of PHA (n = 125). The questions covered surgeon and unit characteristics, and surgeons' understanding of the evidence for treatment, and they explored which patient and injury factors influence treatment allocation.

resultsAlthough some surgeons indicated a preference for one of the treatments, 84% stated that the treatment decision was based on patient and injury-related factors. Severe obesity, drug abuse, a sedentary lifestyle, age > 60 years and delayed diagnosis (> 6 weeks) were considered contraindications to surgical treatment. Also, there was agreement that patients expressing a preference for non-operative treatment should not be operated. Complete avulsions with tendon dislocation ≥ 2-3 cm on MRI were relative indications for surgical treatment. The majority of surgeons did not believe that operatively treated patients did better than non-operatively treated patients and experienced that patients, generally, were satisfied with the treatment result, regardless of the type of treatment. Most surgeons had experienced significant complications to operative treatment.

conclusionCurrent practices varied among different units, and despite the lack of evidence for their prognostic value, several factors were inconsistently being used as decision modifiers when selecting patients for surgical treatment.

Indexed as

HamstringsSurgical interventionTendon injury

Identifiers

PMID35403955
PMCPMC9001781

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.