Duke Physical Therapy, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Br J Sports Med. 2015 Mar;49(6):349-56. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2014-093466. Epub 2014 Sep 16.
Hamstring injury is a prevalent muscle injury in sports. Inconclusive evidence exists for eccentric hamstring strengthening to prevent hamstring injuries. One reason for this discrepancy may be the influence intervention non-compliance has on individual study estimates, and therefore pooled estimates.
This systematic review aims to determine the effect of eccentric hamstring strengthening on the risk of hamstring injury and quantitatively explores the impact of intervention non-compliance on the precision, heterogeneity and strength of pooled estimates.
A computer-assisted literature search of Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, AMED, SportDiscus and PEDro databases was conducted with keywords related to eccentric strengthening and hamstring injury. The search was conducted from the end of a previous comprehensive review forward (1 December 2008 to 31 December 2013). Random-effects models were used for both main effects and a sensitivity analysis. Pooled estimate precision was measured with a confidence limit ratio (confidence limit ratio (CLR); upper limit divided by the lower limit) and heterogeneity was assessed with I(2), Cochrane's-Q and τ(2). A protocol was not registered for this review.
Four out of 349 studies met the inclusion criteria. In main effects analysis, eccentric hamstring training did not reduce the risk of hamstring injury (risk ratio [RR]=0.59 ((95% CI 0.24 to 1.44)). This estimate was imprecise (CLR=6.0) with significant heterogeneity (p value 0.02, 69.6% variation and t(2)=0.57). Subjects compliant with eccentric strengthening had a significant (RR=0.35 ((95% CI 0.23 to 0.55)) reduction in hamstring injuries. This estimate was precise (CLR=2.4) and homogenous (p value=0.38, 2.8% variation and t(2)=0.007).
The null-biased effect in using intent-to-treat methods from intervention non-compliance has a substantial impact on the precision, heterogeneity and the direction and strength of pooled estimates. Eccentric strengthening, with good compliance, appears to be successful in prevention of hamstring injury.
腘绳肌损伤是运动中一种常见的肌肉损伤。在离心性腘绳肌强化预防腘绳肌损伤方面,证据尚不明确。造成这种差异的一个原因可能是干预措施不依从性对个体研究估计值以及汇总估计值的影响。
本系统评价旨在确定离心性腘绳肌强化对腘绳肌损伤风险的影响,并定量探讨干预措施不依从性对汇总估计值的精确性、异质性和强度的影响。
使用与离心性强化和腘绳肌损伤相关的关键词,对 Medline、CINAHL、Cochrane、EMBASE、AMED、SportDiscus 和 PEDro 数据库进行计算机辅助文献检索。检索时间为上一次全面综述结束后向前(2008 年 12 月 1 日至 2013 年 12 月 31 日)。主要效应和敏感性分析均采用随机效应模型。用置信限比(置信限比(CLR);上限除以下限)来衡量汇总估计值的精确性,用 I²、Cochrane's-Q 和 τ²来评估异质性。本研究未对综述进行方案注册。
349 项研究中,有 4 项符合纳入标准。在主要效应分析中,离心性腘绳肌训练并不能降低腘绳肌损伤的风险(风险比 [RR]=0.59(95% CI 0.24 至 1.44))。该估计值不精确(CLR=6.0),且存在显著异质性(p 值 0.02,69.6%的变异和 t²=0.57)。依从性良好的受试者,腘绳肌损伤的发生率显著降低(RR=0.35(95% CI 0.23 至 0.55))。该估计值精确(CLR=2.4)且同质(p 值=0.38,2.8%的变异和 t²=0.007)。
由于干预措施不依从性导致意向治疗方法产生的无偏倚效应,对汇总估计值的精确性、异质性以及方向和强度都有很大的影响。依从性良好的离心性腘绳肌强化似乎能成功预防腘绳肌损伤。