Aims. Avulsion of the proximal hamstring tendon origin can result in significant functional impairment, with surgical re-attachment of the tendons becoming an increasingly recognized treatment. The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of surgical management of proximal hamstring tendon avulsions, and to compare the results between acute and chronic repairs, as well as between partial and complete injuries. Methods. PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTdiscuss, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched. Studies were screened and quality assessed. Results. In all, 35 studies (1,530 surgically-repaired hamstrings) were included. Mean age at time of repair was 44.7 years (12 to 78). A total of 846 tears were acute, and 684 were chronic, with 520 tears being defined as partial, and 916 as complete. Overall, 92.6% of patients were satisfied with the outcome of their surgery. Mean Lower Extremity Functional Score was 74.7, and was significantly higher in the partial injury group. Mean postoperative hamstring strength was 87.0% of the uninjured limb, and was higher in the partial group. The return to sport (RTS) rate was 84.5%, averaging at a return of 6.5 months. RTS was quicker in the acute group. Re-rupture rate was 1.2% overall, and was lower in the acute group. Sciatic nerve dysfunction rate was 3.5% overall, and lower in the acute group (p < 0.05 in all cases). Conclusion. Surgical treatment results in high satisfaction rates, with good functional outcomes, restoration of
To analyze outcomes reported in studies of Ponseti correction of idiopathic clubfoot. A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify a list of outcomes and outcome tools reported in the literature. A total of 865 studies were screened following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and 124 trials were included in the analysis. Data extraction was completed by two researchers for each trial. Each outcome tool was assigned to one of the five core areas defined by the Outcome Measures Recommended for use in Randomized Clinical Trials (OMERACT). Bias assessment was not deemed necessary for the purpose of this paper.Aims
Methods
Due to the overwhelming demand for trauma services, resulting from increasing emergency department attendances over the past decade, virtual fracture clinics (VFCs) have become the fashion to keep up with the demand and help comply with the BOA Standards for Trauma and Orthopaedics (BOAST) guidelines. In this article, we perform a systematic review asking, “How useful are VFCs?”, and what injuries and conditions can be treated safely and effectively, to help decrease patient face to face consultations. Our primary outcomes were patient satisfaction, clinical efficiency and cost analysis, and clinical outcomes. We performed a systematic literature search of all papers pertaining to VFCs, using the search engines PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Database, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) checklist. Searches were carried out and screened by two authors, with final study eligibility confirmed by the senior author.Background
Methods
