Proximal Hamstring Avulsions: Surgical Versus Conservative Treatment Using a Shared Decision-Making Strategy.

Background: Surgical treatment of patients with proximal hamstring avulsions provides good results; however, less is known about the outcome in patients who are offered conservative treatment. Purpose: To investigate the effect of surgical or conservative treatment (decided by a shared decision strategy) of proximal hamstring avulsions. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A total of 24 patients with magnetic resonance imaging-verified proximal hamstring avulsion were included and had either surgical treatment (11 patients, 45% women; mean age, 50 ± 16 years) or conservative treatment (13 patients, 46% women; mean age, 50 ± 17 years). At baseline, 6 months and 12 months, all patients answered the Perth Hamstring Assessment Tool (PHAT) (0-100 scale) and Hip Sports Activity Scale (0-8 scale). Patients had their maximal hip extension strength and maximal strength at 30° and 90° of knee flexion measured in newton meters per kilogram using a handheld dynamometer. A minimal important change in PHAT was considered >7 points and a minimal important change in strength was considered >0.15 N·m/kg, respectively. Results: The surgical group had a shorter time from injury to initiation of treatment compared with the conservative group (median: 15 vs 64 days; Conclusion: Twelve months after treatment of proximal hamstring avulsion, good clinical outcomes were seen when using a shared decision strategy regardless of whether the strategy led to surgical or conservative treatment.