Systematic Review of Outcome Measures Used After Proximal Hamstring Repair
Tara Reza1, Andrew J Hinkle1, Andre Perez-Chaumont1
1School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Background:
Patient-reported outcome measures are important to determine outcomes after orthopaedic procedures. There is currently no standard for outcome measures in the evaluation of patient outcomes after proximal hamstring repair.
Purpose:
To identify and evaluate outcome measures used after proximal hamstring repair.
Study Design:
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
Methods:
A systematic review was performed to identify all English-language articles assessing outcomes after proximal hamstring repair in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, MEDLINE via OvidSP, and Web of Science between 2000 and 2019. After duplicates were removed, studies were selected using eligibility criteria established by the authors. Image reviews, anatomic/histology studies, literature reviews, surgical technique reports, systematic reviews, narrative reviews, case studies, and studies with <5 patients were excluded. Extraction, synthesis, and analysis of outcome measure data were performed using Microsoft Excel. Quality assessment of included studies was performed using Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria.
Results:
After duplicate articles were removed, a total of 304 unique articles were identified and 27 met the inclusion criteria. The mean number of patients with proximal hamstring repairs per study was 40. The most frequently reported outcome measures were return to sport (14/27; 51.9%), custom survey/questionnaire (13/27; 48.1%), and isokinetic hamstring strength testing (13/27; 48.1%). Six of the 10 most commonly used outcome measures were validated and included Lower Extremity Functional Scale, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey, visual analog scale for pain, Perth Hamstring Assessment Tool (PHAT), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and Tegner Activity Scale. Of those, PHAT was the only validated outcome measure designed for proximal hamstring repair.
Conclusion:
There is currently no consensus on the best outcome measurements for the evaluation of patients after proximal hamstring repair. We recommend an increased commitment to the use of return to sport, isokinetic strength testing, Lower Extremity Functional Scale, and PHAT when assessing such injuries. Future studies should aim to define the most reliable methods of outcome measurement in this patient population through consistent use of tools that are clinically relevant and important to patients and can easily be employed in a variety of clinical scenarios.
