Fontanier Vincent, Bruchard Arnaud, Tremblay Mathieu, Mohammed Riaz, da Silva-Oolup Sophia, Suri-Chilana Minisha, Pasquier Mégane, Hachem Sarah, Meyer Anne-Laure, Honoré Margaux, Vigne Grégory, Bermon Stéphane, Murnaghan Kent, Lemeunier Nadège
Medinetic Learning, Research Department, France.
Medinetic Learning, Research Department, France.
J Sci Med Sport. 2025 Jan;28(1):46-55. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2024.07.016. Epub 2024 Aug 8.
To conduct a systematic literature search to identify currently used classifications of acute non-contact muscle injuries in sporting adults.
Scoping review.
A systematic literature search from January 1, 2010 to April 19, 2022 of Medline and SPORTDiscus yielded 13,426 articles that were screened for eligibility. Findings from included studies were qualitatively synthesized. Classifications and their grading, as well as outcomes and definitions were extracted.
Twenty-four classifications were identified from the 37 included studies, most of which had low evidence study designs. Majority (57 %) of classifications were published after 2009 and were mostly developed for hamstring or other lower limb injuries. The six most cited classifications accounted for 70 % of the reports (BAMIC, modified Peetrons, Munich, Cohen, Chan and MLG-R). Outcome reporting was sparse, making it difficult to draw conclusions. Still, significant relationships between grading and time to return to play were reported for the BAMIC, modified Peetrons, Munich and Cohen classifications. Other classifications either had a very low number of reported associations, reported no associations, reported inconclusive associations, or did not report an assessment of the association. Other outcomes were poorly investigated.
There is no agreed-upon use of muscle classification, and no consensus on definitions and terminology. As a result, reported outcomes and their relationship to severity grading are inconsistent across studies. There is a need to improve the generalizability and applicability of existing classifications and to refine their prognostic value. High-level evidence studies are needed to resolve these inconsistencies.
进行系统的文献检索,以确定目前在成年运动员急性非接触性肌肉损伤中使用的分类方法。
范围综述。
对2010年1月1日至2022年4月19日期间的Medline和SPORTDiscus进行系统文献检索,共获得13426篇文章,并对其进行资格筛选。对纳入研究的结果进行定性综合分析。提取分类及其分级,以及结果和定义。
从37项纳入研究中确定了24种分类方法,其中大多数研究设计的证据水平较低。大多数(57%)分类方法是在2009年之后发表的,主要是针对腘绳肌或其他下肢损伤制定的。被引用最多的六种分类方法占报告的70%(BAMIC、改良的Peetrons、慕尼黑、科恩、陈和MLG-R)。结果报告较少,难以得出结论。不过,BAMIC、改良的Peetrons、慕尼黑和科恩分类方法报告了分级与恢复比赛时间之间的显著关系。其他分类方法要么报告的关联数量非常少,要么未报告关联,要么报告的关联不确定,要么未报告对关联的评估。对其他结果的研究较少。
目前尚无公认的肌肉损伤分类方法,在定义和术语上也未达成共识。因此,各研究报告的结果及其与严重程度分级的关系不一致。需要提高现有分类方法的通用性和适用性,并完善其预后价值。需要开展高水平的证据研究来解决这些不一致问题。