Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Back in stride: patient perspectives on operative and nonoperative treatment and recovery after acute proximal hamstring avulsions - a qualitative study.
Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcome measures indicate favorable results after both operative and nonoperative treatment of acute proximal hamstring avulsions. However, little is known about the patients´ experience with treatment and recovery. The aim of this study was to explore the patient perspective on proximal hamstring avulsions, spanning the trajectory from injury through treatment and rehabilitation to the final outcome.
methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted in groups with participants treated either operatively or nonoperatively for a proximal hamstring avulsion. Participants in the “Proximal Hamstring Avulsion Clinical Trial”, a parallel randomized controlled trial and observational cohort, were invited to take part in this focus group study. One focus group included participants who experienced persistent disabling neurological symptoms. Interviews were conducted 22–50 months after injury. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. The data were analyzed using Systemic Text Condensation.
resultsEighteen participants from 30–70 years of age were divided into five focus groups. The inductive analysis led to the following five themes: Concern and uncertainty in the initial phase, Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment, Motivational factors, Physical and psychological sequelae, and “When things do not turn out as expected”. The latter theme was related to participants suffering persistent disabling neurological symptoms. Participants were overall satisfied with their treatment and motivated to return to pre-injury activities and mostly succeeded in doing so. However, most participants experienced lingering discomfort even years after injury. For those who suffered persistent disabling symptoms, quality of life remained significantly reduced. Experiences were similar across treatments, though surgical patients felt reassured everything had been done, while some nonsurgical patients wondered if surgery might have led to better results.
conclusionThe findings of this study provide valuable insights for patient education and improving management strategies for proximal hamstring avulsions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.