Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Clinically it is understood that rapid increases in training loads expose an athlete to an increased risk of injury; however, there are no systematic reviews to qualify this statement. Objective The aim of this systematic review was to determine training and competition loads, and the relationship between injury, illness and soreness. Methods The MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL and EMBASE databases were searched using a predefined search strategy. Studies were included if they analysed the relationship between training or competition loads and injury or illness, and were published prior to October 2015. Participants were athletes of any age or level of competition. The quality of the studies included in the review was evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS). The level of evidence was defined as strong, ‘consistent findings among multiple high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs)’; moderate, ‘consistent findings among multiple low-quality RCTs and/or non-randomised controlled trials (CCTs) and/or one high-quality RCT’; limited, ‘one low-quality RCT and/or CCTs, conflicting evidence’; conflicting, ‘inconsistent findings among multiple trials (RCTs and/or CCTs)’; or no evidence, ‘no RCTs or CCTs’. Results A total of 799 studies were identified; 23 studies met the inclusion criteria, and a further 12 studies that were not identified in the search but met the inclusion criteria were subsequently added to the review. The largest number of studies evaluated the relationship between injuries and training load in rugby league players ( n   =  9) followed by cricket ( n   =  5), football ( n   =  3), Australian Football ( n   =  3), rugby union ( n   =  2),volleyball ( n   =  2), baseball ( n   =  2), water polo ( n   =  1), rowing ( n   =  1), basketball ( n   =  1), swimming ( n   =  1), middle-distance runners ( n   =  1) and various sports combined ( n   =  1). Moderate evidence for a significant relationship was observed between training loads and injury incidence in the majority of studies ( n   =  27, 93 %). In addition, moderate evidence exists for a significant relationship between training loads and illness incidence ( n   =  6, 75 %). Training loads were reported to have a protective effect against injury ( n   =  9, 31 %) and illness ( n  = 1, 13 %). The median (range) NOS score for injury and illness was 8 (5–9) and 6 (5–9), respectively. Limitations A limitation of this systematic review was the a priori search strategy. Twelve further studies were included that were not identified in the search strategy, thus potentially introducing bias. The quality assessment was completed by only one author. Conclusions The results of this systematic review highlight that there is emerging moderate evidence for the relationship between the training load applied to an athlete and the occurrence of injury and illness. Implications The training load applied to an athlete appears to be related to their risk of injury and/or illness. Sports science and medicine professionals working with athletes should monitor this load and avoid acute spikes in loads. It is recommended that internal load as the product of the rate of perceived exertion (10-point modified Borg) and duration be used when determining injury risk in team-based sports. External loads measured as throw counts should also be monitored and collected across a season to determine injury risk in throwing populations. Global positioning system-derived distances should be utilised in team sports, and injury monitoring should occur for at least 4 weeks after spikes in loads.

Background Functional data analysis (FDA) is increasingly being used to better analyze, model and predict time series data. Key aspects of FDA include the choice of smoothing technique, data reduction, adjustment for clustering, functional linear modeling and forecasting methods. Methods A systematic review using 11 electronic databases was conducted to identify FDA application studies published in the peer-review literature during 1995–2010. Papers reporting methodological considerations only were excluded, as were non-English articles. Results In total, 84 FDA application articles were identified; 75.0% of the reviewed articles have been published since 2005. Application of FDA has appeared in a large number of publications across various fields of sciences; the majority is related to biomedicine applications (21.4%). Overall, 72 studies (85.7%) provided information about the type of smoothing techniques used, with B-spline smoothing (29.8%) being the most popular. Functional principal component analysis (FPCA) for extracting information from functional data was reported in 51 (60.7%) studies. One-quarter (25.0%) of the published studies used functional linear models to describe relationships between explanatory and outcome variables and only 8.3% used FDA for forecasting time series data. Conclusions Despite its clear benefits for analyzing time series data, full appreciation of the key features and value of FDA have been limited to date, though the applications show its relevance to many public health and biomedical problems. Wider application of FDA to all studies involving correlated measurements should allow better modeling of, and predictions from, such data in the future especially as FDA makes no a priori age and time effects assumptions.

Injury and illness surveillance, and epidemiological studies, are fundamental elements of concerted efforts to protect the health of the athlete. To encourage consistency in the definitions and methodology used, and to enable data across studies to be compared, research groups have published 11 sport-specific or setting-specific consensus statements on sports injury (and, eventually, illness) epidemiology to date. Our objective was to further strengthen consistency in data collection, injury definitions and research reporting through an updated set of recommendations for sports injury and illness studies, including a new Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist extension. The IOC invited a working group of international experts to review relevant literature and provide recommendations. The procedure included an open online survey, several stages of text drafting and consultation by working groups and a 3-day consensus meeting in October 2019. This statement includes recommendations for data collection and research reporting covering key components: defining and classifying health problems; severity of health problems; capturing and reporting athlete exposure; expressing risk; burden of health problems; study population characteristics and data collection methods. Based on these, we also developed a new reporting guideline as a STROBE Extension—the STROBE Sports Injury and Illness Surveillance (STROBE-SIIS). The IOC encourages ongoing in- and out-of-competition surveillance programmes and studies to describe injury and illness trends and patterns, understand their causes and develop measures to protect the health of the athlete. Implementation of the methods outlined in this statement will advance consistency in data collection and research reporting.

In 2013, the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center Overuse Injury Questionnaire (OSTRC-O) was developed to record the magnitude, symptoms and consequences of overuse injuries in sport. Shortly afterwards, a modified version of the OSTRC-O was developed to capture all types of injuries and illnesses—The Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center Questionnaire on Health Problems (OSTRC-H). Since then, users from a range of research and clinical environments have identified areas in which these questionnaires may be improved. Therefore, the structure and content of the questionnaires was reviewed by an international panel consisting of the original developers, other user groups and experts in sports epidemiology and applied statistical methodology. Following a review panel meeting in October 2017, several changes were made to the questionnaires, including minor wording alterations, changes to the content of one question and the addition of questionnaire logic. In this paper, we present the updated versions of the questionnaires (OSTRC-O2 and OSTRC-H2), assess the likely impact of the updates on future data collection and discuss practical issues related to application of the questionnaires. We believe this update will improve respondent adherence and improve the quality of collected data.

Background: Injury and illness surveillance, and epidemiological studies, are fundamental elements of concerted efforts to protect the health of the athlete. To encourage consistency in the definitions and methodology used, and to enable data across studies to be compared, research groups have published 11 sport- or setting-specific consensus statements on sports injury (and, eventually, illnesses) epidemiology to date. Objective: To further strengthen consistency in data collection, injury definitions, and research reporting through an updated set of recommendations for sports injury and illness studies, including a new Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist extension. Study Design: Consensus statement of the International Olympic Committee (IOC). Methods: The IOC invited a working group of international experts to review relevant literature and provide recommendations. The procedure included an open online survey, several stages of text drafting and consultation by working groups, and a 3-day consensus meeting in October 2019. Results: This statement includes recommendations for data collection and research reporting covering key components: defining and classifying health problems, severity of health problems, capturing and reporting athlete exposure, expressing risk, burden of health problems, study population characteristics, and data collection methods. Based on these, we also developed a new reporting guideline as a STROBE extension—the STROBE Sports Injury and Illness Surveillance (STROBE-SIIS). Conclusion: The IOC encourages ongoing in- and out-of-competition surveillance programs and studies to describe injury and illness trends and patterns, understand their causes, and develop measures to protect the health of the athlete. The implementation of the methods outlined in this statement will advance consistency in data collection and research reporting.

BackgroundInjury prevention requires information about how, why, where and when injuries occur. The Australian Sports Injury Data Dictionary (ASIDD) was developed to guide sports injury data collection and reporting. Sports Medicine Australia (SMA) disseminated associated data collection forms and an online tool to practitioners and the sports community. This paper assesses the long-term value, usefulness and relevance of the ASIDD and SMA tools.MethodsA systematic search strategy identified both peer-reviewed and grey literature that used the ASIDD and/or the SMA tools, during 1997–2016. A text-based search was conducted within 10 electronic databases, as well as a Google Image search for the SMA tools. Documents were categorised according to ASIDD use as: (1) collected injury data; (2) informed data coding; (3) developed an injury data collection tool and/or (4) reference only.ResultsOf the 36 peer-reviewed articles, 83% directly referred to ASIDD and 17% mentioned SMA tools. ASIDD was mainly used for data coding (42%), reference (36%), data collection (17%) or resource development (14%). In contrast, 86% of 66 grey literature sources referenced, used or modified the SMA data collection forms.ConclusionsThe ASIDD boasts a long history of use and relevance. Its ongoing use by practitioners has been facilitated by the ready availability of specific data collection forms by SMA for them to apply to directly their settings. Injury prevention practitioners can be strongly engaged in injury surveillance activities when formal guidance is supported by user-friendly tools directly relevant to their settings and practice.

Sport and recreation is beneficial for health and wellbeing but comes with a probability of loss, including occasional fatal injuries. Following high-profile injury deaths in Australia, concerns are raised regarding the safety of sport participation. To understand the scale and scope of injury deaths, and identify potential prevention opportunities, the aim of this investigation was to describe the number and nature of fatal injuries in Australian sport and recreation. This is a retrospective cohort study of injury deaths reported between 1 July 2000 to 31 December 2019 using data from the National Coronial Information System, Australia. Unintentional deaths with an external cause, where the activity was recorded as sport and exercise during leisure time were included. Drowning deaths were excluded. Presented are the number and % of cases by age, sex, sport, broad cause and annual crude death rate (population). There were 1192 deaths, averaging 63 per year. Deaths were mostly in males (84.4%), with the largest proportion in people aged 15-24 years (23.1%). Wheeled motor (26.9%) and non-motor (16.2%) sports accounted for the highest proportion of cases. The primary mechanism of death was most commonly blunt force (85.4%), followed by piercing/penetrating force (5.0%). The years 2001 and 2005 recorded the highest crude injury death rate (2001, n = 92, 0.47 per 100,000 population; 2005, n = 95, 0.47 per 100,000 population). On average, there is more than one injury death per week in a sport or recreation setting in Australia. Cases occurred in many sports and recreation activities, including those generally considered to be safe (e.g. individual athletic activities, team ball sports.) Detailed investigation of the coronial recommendations that are present within each case is now needed to understand and identify potential prevention opportunities.

Public health policy is a successful population-level strategy for injury prevention but it is yet to be widely applied to the sports sector. Such policy is generally coordinated by government health departments concerned with the allocation of limited resources to health service delivery and preventive programs for addressing large community health issues. Prioritisation of sports injury prevention (SIP) requires high-quality evidence about the size of the problem and its public health burden; identification of at-risk vulnerable groups; confirmed effective prevention solutions; evidence of intervention cost-effectiveness; and quantification of both financial and policy implications of inaction. This paper argues that the major reason for a lack of sports injury policy by government departments for health or sport to date is a lack of relevant information available for policy makers to make their decisions. Key information gaps evident in Australia are used to highlight this problem. SIP policy does not yet rank highly because, relative to other health/injury issues, there is very little hard evidence to support: claims for its priority ranking, the existence of solutions that can be implemented and which will work, and potential cost-savings to government agencies. Moreover, policy action needs to be integrated across government portfolios, including sport, health and others. Until sports medicine research generates high-quality population-level information of direct relevance and importance to policy makers, especially intervention costing and implementation cost-benefit estimates, and fully engage in policy-informing partnerships, SIP will continue to be left off the public health agenda.

Cricket was the first sport to publish recommended methods for injury surveillance in 2005. Since then, there have been changes to the nature of both cricket and injury surveillance. Researchers representing the major cricket playing nations met to propose changes to the previous recommendations, with an agreed voting block of 14. It was decided that 10 of 14 votes (70%) were required to add a new definition element and 11 of 14 (80%) were required to amend a previous definition. In addition to the previously agreed ‘Match time-loss’ injury, definitions of ‘General time-loss’, ‘Medical presentation’, ‘Player-reported’ and ‘Imaging-abnormality’ injuries are now provided. Further, new injury incidence units of match injuries per 1000 player days, and annual injuries per 100 players per year are recommended. There was a shift towards recommending a greater number of possible definitions, due to differing contexts and foci of cricket research (eg, professional vs amateur; injury surveillance systems vs specific injury category studies). It is recommended that researchers use and report as many of the definitions as possible to assist both comparisons between studies within cricket and with those from other sports.

Well-developed physical qualities may protect against contact injuries. However, the potential contribution of physical qualities as risk or protective factors to contact injury risk is yet to be determined for rugby league. This study applied a frailty survival model that accounts for recurrent injury to identify risk factors for all physiotherapist-reported contact injury in professional rugby league players. Prospective cohort study. Sixty-six professional rugby league players participated in this three successive year prospective study. At the start of each season, all players underwent measurements of standard anthropometry (height, body mass, and sum of seven skinfolds), speed (10m and 40m sprint), muscular strength (1 repetition maximum [RM] bench press, 1RM squat, 1RM weighted chin-ups), power (vertical jump, bench throw, 1RM power clean, jump squat), and endurance (maximum repetition bench press with 60kg resistance), repeated-sprint ability (12×20m sprints performed on a 20s cycle), prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability (8×12s maximal effort shuttles performed on a 48s cycle), and maximal aerobic power (multi-stage fitness test). Data was used to demonstrate the application of the frailty model extension of the Cox proportional regression model for recurrent events to identify factors associated with a high hazard ratio (HR) of injury. Heavier (body mass, HR=2.6, 95% CI=1.2–5.7), and faster (40m sprint, HR=2.1, 95% CI=1.0–4.2) players, and those with poorly developed prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability (HR=2.9, 95% CI=1.7–5.0) and upper-body strength (chin-up, HR=2.2, 95% CI=1.3–3.7) had a higher incidence of contact injuries. This study demonstrates application of a novel statistical approach for the analysis of injury data that is recurrent in nature. This approach identified that the greater impact forces generated from heavier players with faster speed may result in an increase in recurrent contact injury rates. However, the development of prolonged high-intensity intermittent running ability and upper-body strength and power may assist to reduce the risk of contact injury in professional rugby league players.