Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Interventions for preventing hamstring injuries

This is not the most recent version

References

Additional references

Agre 1985

Agre JC. Hamstring injuries. Proposed aetiological factors, prevention, and treatment. Sports Medicine 1985;2(1):21‐33.

Altman 2003

Altman DG, Bland JM. Interaction revisited: the difference between two estimates. BMJ 2003;326(7382):219.

Arnason 2005

Arnason A, Engebretsen L, Bahr R. No effect of a video‐based awareness program on the rate of soccer injuries. American Journal of Sports Medicine 2005;33(1):77‐84.

Brandser 1995

Brandser EA, el‐Khoury GY, Kathol MH, Callaghan JJ, Tearse DS. Hamstring injuries: radiographic, conventional tomographic, CT, and MR imaging characteristics. Radiology 1995;197(1):257‐62.

Brosseau 2002

Brosseau L, Casimiro L, Milne S, Robinson VA, Shea BJ, Tugwell P, et al. Deep transverse friction massage for treating tendinitis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2002, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003528]

Cibulka 1986

Cibulka MT, Rose SJ, Delitto A, Sinacore DR. Hamstring muscle strain treated by mobilizing the sacroiliac joint. Physical Therapy 1986;66(8):1220‐3.

Croisier 2002

Croisier JL, Forthomme B, Namurois MH, Vanderthommen M, Crielaard JM. Hamstring muscle strain recurrence and strength performance disorders. American Journal of Sports Medicine 2002;30(2):199‐203.

Croisier 2004

Croisier JL. Factors associated with recurrent hamstring injuries. Sports Medicine 2004;34(10):681‐95.

Emery 2007

Emery CA, Rose, MS, McAllister JR, Meeuwisse WH. A prevention strategy to reduce the incidence of injury in high school basketball: a cluster randomized controlled trial. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine 2007;17(1):17‐24.

Foreman 2006

Foreman TK, Addy T, Baker S, Burns J, Hill N, Madden T. Prospective studies into the causation of hamstring injuries in sport: a systematic review. Physical Therapy in Sport 2006;7(2):101‐9.

Frank 2007

Frank JB, Jarit GJ. Bravman JT, Rosen JE. Lower extremity injuries in the skeletally immature athlete. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 2007;15(6):356‐66.

Garrett 1984

Garrett WE, Califf JC, Bassett FH. Histochemical correlates of hamstring injuries. American Journal of Sports Medicine 1984;12(2):98‐103.

Garrett 1996

Garrett WE. Muscle strain injuries. American Journal of Sports Medicine 1996;24(6 Suppl):S2‐8.

Gleim 1997

Gleim GW, McHugh MP. Flexibility and its effects on sports football medical research program: an audit of injuries in injury and performance. Sports Medicine 1997;24:289‐99.

Goodburn 1995

Goodburn EA, Ross DA. A picture of health: A review and annotated bibliography of the health of young people in developing countries. World Health Organization and UNICEF Vol. WHO/FHE/ADH/95.4.

Hawkins 1999

Hawkins RD, Fuller CW. A prospective epidemiological study of injuries in four English professional football clubs. British Journal of Sports Medicine 1999;33(3):196‐203.

Hawkins 2001

Hawkins RD, Hulse MA, Wilkinson C, Hodson A, Gibson M. The association football medical research programme: an audit of injuries in professional football. British Journal of Sports Medicine 2001;35(1):43‐47.

Higgins 2003

Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta‐analyses. BMJ 2003;327(7414):557‐60.

Higgins 2005

Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Highly sensitive search strategies for identifying reports of randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 4.2.5 [updated May 2005]; Appendix 5b. www.cochrane.org/resources/handbook/hbook.htm (accessed 01 May 2007).

Hoskins 2005

Hoskins W, Pollard HP. Successful management of hamstring injuries in Australian Rules footballers: two case reports. Chiropractic & Osteopathy 2005;13(4):1‐5.

Inklar 1994

Inklaar H. Soccer injuries II: aetiology and prevention. Sports Medicine 1994;18(2):81‐93.

Kellet 1986

Kellett J. Acute soft tissue injuries ‐ a review of the literature. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 1986;18(5):489‐500.

Knapik 1992

Knapik JJ, Jones BH, Bauman CL, Harris JM. Strength, flexibility and athletic injuries. Sports Medicine 1992;14(5):277‐88.

Kroll 1997

Kroll PG, Raya MA. Hamstring muscles: An overview of anatomy, biomechanics and function, injury etiology, treatment, and prevention. Critical Reviews in Physical & Rehabilitation Medicine 1997;9(3‐4):191‐203.

Kujala 1997

Kujala UM, Orava S, Jarvinen, M. Hamstring injuries. Current trends in treatment and prevention. Sports Medicine 1997;23(6):397‐404.

Noonan 1999

Noonan TJ, Garrett WE. Muscle strain injury: diagnosis and treatment. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 1999;7(4):262‐269.

Orchard 2001

Orchard J, Steet E, Walker C, Ibrahim A, Rigney L, Houang M. Hamstring muscle strain injury caused by isokinetic testing. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine 2001;11(4):274‐6.

Orchard 2002

Orchard J. Biomechanics of muscle strain injury. New Zealand Journal of Sports Medicine 2002;30(4):90‐96.

Orchard 2002a

Orchard J, Seward H. Epidemiology of injuries in the Australian Football League, seasons 1997‐2000.. British Journal of Sports Medicine 2002;36(1):39‐44.

Safran 1988

Safran MR, Garrett WE, Seaber AV, Glisson RR, Ribbeck BM. The role of warmup in muscular injury prevention. American Journal of Sports Medicine 1988;16(2):123‐9.

Taimela 1990

Taimela S, Kujala UM, Osterman K. Intrinsic risk factors and athletic injuries. Sports Medicine 1990;9(4):205‐15.

Turl 1998

Turl SE, George KP. Adverse neural tension: a factor in repetitive hamstring strain?. Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy 1998;27(1):16‐21.

Van Mechelen 1992

Van Mechelen W, Hlobil H, Kemper HC. Incidence, severity, aetiology and prevention of sports injuries. A review of concepts. Sports Medicine 1992;14(2):82‐99.

Verrall 2001

Verrall GM, Slavotinek JP, Barnes PG, Fon GT, Spriggins AJ. Clinical risk factors for hamstring muscle strain injury: a prospective study with correlation of injury by magnetic resonance imaging. British Journal of Sports Medicine 2001;35(6):435‐9.

Verrall 2005

Verrall GM, Slavotinek JP, Barnes PG. The effect of sports specific training on reducing the incidence of hamstring injuries in professional Australian Rules football players. British Journal of Sports Medicine 2005;39(6):363‐8.

Woods 2004

Woods C, Hawkins RD, Maltby S, Hulse M, Thomas A, Hodson A. The Football Association Medical Research Programme: an audit of injuries in professional football‐analysis of hamstring injuries. British Journal of Sports Medicine 2004;38(1):36‐41.

Worrell 1992

Worrell T, Perrin D. Hamstring muscle injury: the influence of strength, flexibility, warm‐up, and fatigue. Journal of Orthopaedic Sports Physical Therapy 1992;16(1):12‐8.
Table 1. Methodological quality assessment scheme

Items

Scores

Notes

A. Was an effective method of randomisation used?

Y = yes, e.g. use of random tables
? = no description of method
N = quasi‐randomised method only

To achieve 'Y', a random (unpredictable) assignment sequence is required.

B. Was the assigned treatment adequately concealed prior to allocation?

Y = method did not allow disclosure of assignment ? = small but possible chance of disclosure of assignment or unclear N = quasi‐randomised or open list/tables

For example, a method using centralised (e.g. allocation by a central office unaware of subject characteristics) or independently‐controlled randomisation.

Cochrane code (see Handbook): Clearly yes = A; Not sure = B; Clearly no = C.

C. Were the outcomes of participants who withdrew described and included in the analysis (intention to treat)?

Y = no dropouts or withdrawals well described and accounted for in analysis.
? = withdrawals described and analysis not possible
N = no mention, inadequate mention, or obvious differences and no adjustment

D. Were the outcome assessors blind to assignment status?

Y = effective action taken to blind outcome assessors
? = small or moderate chance of unblinding of outcome assessors
N = not possible, or not mentioned (unless double‐blind), or possible but not done

E. Were the treatment and control groups comparable at entry?

Y = good comparability of groups, or confounding adjusted for in analysis
? = confounding small; mentioned but not adjusted for
N = large potential for confounding, or not discussed

The principal confounders considered were sex, age, previous overuse lower‐limb injury and prior physical activity profile.

F. Were the participants blind to assignment status after allocation?

Y = effective action taken to blind participants
? = small or moderate chance of unblinding of participants
N = not possible, or not mentioned (unless double‐blind), or possible but not done

G. Were the treatment providers blind to assignment status?

Y = effective action taken to blind treatment providers
? = small or moderate chance of unblinding of treatment providers
N = not possible, or not mentioned (unless double‐blind), or possible but not done

H. Were care programmes, other than the trial options, identical?

Y = care programmes clearly identical
? = clear but trivial differences
N = not mentioned or clear and important differences in care

Examples of clinically important differences in other interventions (co‐interventions) are those which could act as active measures for prevention of hamstring injuries: training programmes, advice on activity and etc.

I. Were the inclusion and exclusion criteria clearly defined?

Y = clearly defined
? = inadequately defined
N = not defined

To achieve 'Y', the inclusion or exclusion of individuals with a) previous hamstring injuries and b) previous exposure to trial intervention needs to be confirmed.

J. Were the interventions clearly defined?

Y = clearly defined interventions are applied with a standardised protocol
? = clearly defined interventions are applied but the application protocol is not standardised
N = intervention and/or application protocol are poorly or not defined

K. Were the outcome measures used clearly defined? (by outcome)

Y = optimal
? = adequate
N = not defined, not adequate

To achieve 'Y', the method and strategy of data collection need to be clearly defined.

L. Were diagnostic tests used in outcome assessment clinically useful? (by outcome)

Y = clearly defined and best available tests are applied with a standardised protocol
? = clearly defined tests are applied but the application protocol is not standardised
N = tests and/or application protocol are poorly or not defined

M. Is the surveillance active, and of clinically appropriate duration?(by outcome)

Y = active surveillance and appropriate duration
? = active surveillance, but inadequate duration
N = surveillance not active or not defined

N. Was compliance of subjects disclosed?

Y = compliance greater than 90% in each group after randomisation
? = compliance with allocated procedure reported
N = compliance not mentioned

Measures of compliance are likely to vary and thus the way of estimating the 90% compliance will depend on the measures used in individual trials.

Figures and Tables -
Table 1. Methodological quality assessment scheme