Objective To systematically review the association between hip adduction and abduction strength, and adduction-to-abduction strength ratio in healthy athletes with the occurrence of future groin pain and time-loss groin injuries. Design Systematic review with meta-analysis. Data sources PubMed, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, PEDro, Embase, and Scopus. Eligibility criteria Studies included had to (1) measure hip adductor or abductor strength in healthy athletes, (2) conduct a follow-up period to assess the occurrence of groin pain, (3) present strength data separately for participants who remained uninjured and those who suffered an injury and (4) use a prospective design. Risk of bias was assessed according to the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. The certainty in the evidence appraised was measured using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation approach. Results Thirteen prospective cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall study risk of bias was rated as low. Players who remained uninjured had stronger adduction strength compared with players who subsequently suffered groin pain (standardised mean differences with 95% CIs (SMD=−0.5, 95% CI −0.92 to −0.09)) and time-loss groin pain (SMD=−0.68, 95% CI −1.31 to −0.06). Trivial effects were observed for abduction strength (groin pain SMD=0.03, 95% CI −0.11 to 0.17; time-loss SMD=−0.07, 95% CI −0.25 to 0.11) and adduction-to-abduction strength ratio (groin pain SMD=−0.02, 95% CI −0.55 to 0.51; time-loss SMD=−0.11, 95% CI −1.11 to 0.89). Age and diagnostic criteria were not significant moderators of the relationship between adductor strength and groin pain (p=0.72 and p=0.12). Conclusion There is a moderate effect of hip adductor strength on the occurrence of groin pain, while there is no relationship between either abductor strength or the ratio of adductor-to-abductor strength with the occurrence of groin pain. PROSPERO registration number CRD42024548630. Data are available upon reasonable request.

中文翻译：

---

健康运动员的髋内收肌或外展肌力量是否与未来的腹股沟疼痛有关？系统评价和荟萃分析


目的 系统评价健康运动员髋关节内收与外展力量、内收与外展力量比与未来腹股沟疼痛和时间损失性腹股沟损伤发生率的关系。设计 系统评价与荟萃分析。数据源 PubMed、Web of Science、SPORTDiscus、PEDro、Embase 和 Scopus。纳入资格标准的研究必须 （1） 测量健康运动员的髋内收肌或外展肌力量，（2） 进行随访以评估腹股沟疼痛的发生，（3） 分别为未受伤和受伤的参与者提供力量数据，以及 （4） 使用前瞻性设计。根据 Quality in Prognosis Studies 工具评估偏倚风险。使用建议分级、评估、开发和评价方法衡量评价证据的质量。结果 13 项前瞻性队列研究符合纳入标准。总体研究偏倚风险被评为低。与随后遭受腹股沟疼痛（标准化均数差为 95% CI（SMD=−0.5,95% CI -0.92 至 -0.09）））和时间损失性腹股沟疼痛（SMD=−0.68,95% CI -1.31 至 -0.06）的球员相比，未受伤的球员具有更强的内收力量。观察到外展强度（腹股沟疼痛 SMD=0.03,95% CI -0.11 至 0.17;时间损失 SMD=-0.07,95% CI -0.25 至 0.11）和内收与外展力量比（腹股沟疼痛 SMD=-0.02,95% CI -0.55 至 0.51;时间损失 SMD=-0.11,95% CI -1.11 至 0.89）的影响微乎其微。年龄和诊断标准不是内收肌力量与腹股沟疼痛之间关系的显著调节因素 （p=0.72 和 p=0.12）。 结论 髋内收肌力量对腹股沟疼痛的发生有中等影响，而外展肌力量或内收肌与外展肌力量的比值与腹股沟疼痛的发生无关。PROSPERO 注册号 CRD42024548630。数据可根据合理要求提供。