Search

Background: Combat sports involve body contact through striking, kicking and/or throwing. They are anecdotally referred to as 'dangerous', yet long-term investigation into specific injury rates is yet to be explored.Objective: To describe incidence and prevalence of injury and illness within Olympic combat sports and to investigate risk of bias of prospective injury and illness research within these sports.Methods: We systematically searched literature published up until May 2016. We included prospective studies of injury/illness in elite combat athletes lasting more than 12 weeks. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified version of the Downs and Black checklist for methodological quality. Included studies were mapped to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine levels of evidence.Results: Nine studies were included, and most (n=6) had moderate risk of bias. Studies provided level 1/2b evidence that the most frequently injured areas were the head/face (45.8%), wrist (12.0%) and lower back (7.8%) in boxing; the lower back (10.9%), shoulder (10.2%) and knee (9.7%) in judo; the fingers (22.8%) and thigh (9.1%) in taekwondo; and the knee (24.8%), shoulder (17.8%) and head/face (16.6%) in wrestling. Heterogeneity of injury severity classifications and inconsistencies inexposure measures prevented any direct comparisons of injury severity/incidence across combat sports.Conclusions: There is currently a lack of consensus in the collection of injury/illness data, limiting the development of prevention programmes for combat sport as a whole. However, sport-specific data that identify body areas with high injury frequency can provide direction to clinicians, enabling them to focus their attention on developing pathologies in these areas. In doing so, clinicians can enhance the practical elements of their role within the integrated combat sport performance team and assist in the regular update of surveillance records. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Previous injury is a strong risk factor for recurrent lower limb injury in athletic populations, yet the association between previous injury and a subsequent injury different in nature or location is rarely considered.Objective: To systematically review data on the risk of sustaining a subsequent lower limb injury different in nature or location following a previous injury.Methods: Eight medical databases were searched. Studies were eligible if they reported lower limb injury occurrence following any injury of a different anatomical site and/or of a different nature, assessed injury risk, contained athletic human participants and were written in English. Two reviewers independently applied the eligibility criteria and performed the risk of bias assessment. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model.Results: Twelve studies satisfied the eligibility criteria. Previous history of an ACL injury was associated with an increased risk of subsequent hamstring injury (three studies, RR=2.25, 95% CI 1.34 to 3.76), but a history of chronic groin injury was not associated with subsequent hamstring injury (three studies, RR=1.14, 95% CI 0.29 to 4.51). Previous lower limb muscular injury was associated with an increased risk of sustaining a lower limb muscular injury at a different site. A history of concussion and a variety of joint injuries were associated with an increased subsequent lower limb injury risk.Conclusions: The fact that previous injury of any type may increase the risk for a range of lower limb subsequent injuries must be considered in the development of future tertiary prevention programmes.Systematic Review Registration Number: CRD42016039904 (PROSPERO). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cost-benefit analyses have been proposed for determining acceptable risk of injury regarding training and competition participation. Currently, there is no best evidence synthesis of the literature evaluating the relationship between injury/illness and chance of success or failure.Objective: To evaluate the relationship between injury and/or illness and success and/or failure in athletic populations (individual and team sports).Methods: This review was prospectively registered (PROSPERO CRD42016036729) and a systematic electronic search was conducted in May 2016. Inclusion criterion was any study design describing the association between injury and/or illness and success or failure in athletic performance. Two independent authors screened search results, performed data extraction and assessed methodological quality and strength of evidence using a modified Downs and Black appraisal tool and a modified van Tulder method, respectively.Results: Of 10 546 titles identified, 14 satisfied the inclusion criteria and 7 had low risk of bias. Outcome measures associated with success and/or failure included: (1) availability of team members, (2) injury incidence, (3) injury burden, (4) squad utilisation and (5, 6) precompetition and in-competition injury. There was strong evidence that (1) increased availability of team members/athletes decreased the risk of failure and (2) precompetition and in-competition injuries were associated with increased risk of failure.Conclusions: Injuries have a detrimental impact on team and individual athletic success. Increased player availability improves chances of success. Conversely, injuries sustained both prior to and during competition may increase risk of failure. Injury prevention should therefore be a priority for maximising athletic performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Training loads contribute to sports injury risk but their mitigation has rarely been considered in a sports injury prevention framework. A key concept behind monitoring training loads for injury prevention is to screen for those at increased risk of injury so that workloads can be adjusted to minimise these risks. This review describes how advances in management of workload can be applied as a preventive measure. Primary prevention involves screening for preparticipation load risk factors, such as low training loads, prior to a training period or competition. Secondary prevention involves screening for workloads that are known to precede an injury developing so that modification can be undertaken to mitigate this risk. Tertiary prevention involves rehabilitation practices that include a graded return to training programme to reduce the risk of sustaining a subsequent injury. The association of training loads with injury incidence is now established. Prevention measures such as rule changes that affect the workload of an athlete are universal whereas those that address risk factors of an asymptomatic subgroup are more selective. Prevention measures, when implemented for asymptomatic individuals exhibiting possible injury risk factors, are indicated for an athlete at risk of developing a sports injury. Seven key indicated risks and associated prevention measures are proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author discusses the prevention of tennis-related injuries. He mentions the relationship between higher training loads and higher injury rates, the article "The training-injury prevention paradox: should athletes be training smarter and harder?" by T. J. Gabbett, and the application of load approach to tennis. The author provides tips for preventing tennis injuries which includes establishing basic fitness level, avoiding peak in loads, and maintaining correct work-rest balance.

The author reflects on a study by M. Sailly and colleagues on the development of groin pain-associated public apophysitis in athletes. Topics discussed include the clinical characteristics of pubic apophysis, its primary risk factors such as a change in training load parameters and increasing age and strength, and the importance of conservative management of training load and rehabilitation.