Paton Bruce M, Court Nick, Giakoumis Michael, Head Paul, Kayani Babar, Kelly Sam, Kerkhoffs Gino M M J, Moore James, Moriarty Peter, Murphy Simon, Plastow Ricci, Pollock Noel, Read Paul, Stirling Ben, Tulloch Laura, van Dyk Nicol, Wilson Mathew G, Wood David, Haddad Fares
Institute of Sport Exercise and Health, University College London, London, UK
Physiotherapy Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Br J Sports Med. 2023 Mar;57(5):254-265. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2021-105371. Epub 2023 Jan 17.
Muscle injury classification systems for hamstring injuries have evolved to use anatomy and imaging information to aid management and prognosis. However, classification systems lack reliability and validity data and are not specific to individual hamstring muscles, potentially missing parameters vital for sport-specific and activity-specific decision making. A narrative evidence review was conducted followed by a modified Delphi study to build an international consensus on best-practice decision-making for the classification of hamstring injuries. This comprised a digital information gathering survey to a cohort of 46 international hamstring experts (sports medicine physicians, physiotherapists, surgeons, trainers and sports scientists) who were also invited to a face-to-face consensus group meeting in London . Fifteen of these expert clinicians attended to synthesise and refine statements around the management of hamstring injury. A second digital survey was sent to a wider group of 112 international experts. Acceptance was set at 70% agreement. Rounds 1 and 2 survey response rates were 35/46 (76%) and 99/112 (88.4%) of experts responding. Most commonly, experts used the British Athletics Muscle Injury Classification (BAMIC) (58%), Munich (12%) and Barcelona (6%) classification systems for hamstring injury. Issues identified to advance imaging classifications systems include: detailing individual hamstring muscles, establishing optimal use of imaging in diagnosis and classification, and testing the validity and reliability of classification systems. The most used hamstring injury classification system is the BAMIC. This consensus panel recommends hamstring injury classification systems evolve to integrate imaging and clinical parameters around: individual muscles, injury mechanism, sporting demand, functional criteria and patient-reported outcome measures. More research is needed on surgical referral and effectiveness criteria, and validity and reliability of classification systems to guide management.
腘绳肌损伤的肌肉损伤分类系统已经发展到利用解剖学和影像学信息来辅助管理和预后判断。然而,分类系统缺乏可靠性和有效性数据,且并非针对单个腘绳肌,可能遗漏了对特定运动和特定活动决策至关重要的参数。进行了一项叙述性证据综述,随后开展了一项改良的德尔菲研究,以就腘绳肌损伤分类的最佳实践决策达成国际共识。这包括向46名国际腘绳肌专家(运动医学医生、物理治疗师、外科医生、教练和运动科学家)进行数字信息收集调查,这些专家还被邀请参加在伦敦举行的面对面共识小组会议。其中15名专家临床医生参加会议,以综合和完善有关腘绳肌损伤管理的陈述。向更广泛的112名国际专家群体发送了第二次数字调查。接受度设定为70%的一致同意率。第一轮和第二轮调查的回复率分别为46名专家中的35名(76%)和112名专家中的99名(88.4%)。最常见的情况是,专家们在腘绳肌损伤分类中使用英国田径肌肉损伤分类(BAMIC)(58%)、慕尼黑(12%)和巴塞罗那(6%)分类系统。确定的推进影像学分类系统的问题包括:详细描述单个腘绳肌、确定影像学在诊断和分类中的最佳应用,以及测试分类系统的有效性和可靠性。使用最多的腘绳肌损伤分类系统是BAMIC。该共识小组建议腘绳肌损伤分类系统应发展为整合围绕以下方面的影像学和临床参数:单个肌肉、损伤机制、运动需求、功能标准和患者报告的结局指标。需要更多关于手术转诊和有效性标准以及分类系统的有效性和可靠性的研究,以指导管理。