Injury surveillance in community cricket: A new inning for South Africa

Published injury rates amongst elite and club-level youth cricketers highlight the need to implement injury risk-reducing strategies amongst the youth cricketing population. Data from sports injury surveillance systems are a prerequisite for the development and evaluation of strategies to reduce injury risk. Therefore, collecting injury surveillance data is a positive move towards reducing injuries in cricket. In South Africa, a systematic, standardised, evidence-informed injury surveillance system currently does not exist for community levels of play, namely, in cricket-playing high schools and cricket clubs. Although injury surveillance systems exist at elite levels, the obvious differences in elite versus community cricket settings mean that these systems cannot be implemented in their current form at community-level cricket. An innovative model is required to implement an injury surveillance system in community cricket. Clinical implications: This article proposes and describes a new research–practice partnership model to implement a systematic, standardised, evidence-informed injury surveillance system at cricket-playing high schools or cricket clubs within South Africa. Once this model has been employed, database systems will need to be established to allow long-term data management and sharing

Altered sagittal plane mechanics is associated with functional movement screen deep squat score

DATA AVAILABILITY : Data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, O.L.O., on request.BACKGROUND : The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) assesses the quality of movements, including the deep squat (DS), which is used in sports settings. The validity of the individual item scores has yet to be established. OBJECTIVES : To investigate the validity of the FMS DS by comparing the sagittal plane kinematics of participants who achieve different observer scores. METHOD : Seventeen injury-free, adolescent male cricket bowlers were assessed. The movement was captured using the Optitrack® motion capture system. Simultaneously, observers scored participants’ execution of the DS according to the standard FMS scoring criteria. Participants were grouped into Group 1 (lowest score), Group 2 (altered movement mechanics) or Group 3 (perfect score) according to observer scores. Specific joint angles of each group were compared using the Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests. RESULTS : There were significant differences in the degree to which the femur passed the horizontal between Group 3 and Group 1 (p = 0.04, r = 0.61) and Group 2 and Group 1 (p = 0.03, r = 0.66) and the difference in the degree to which the torso was kept vertical between Group 3 and Group 1 (p = 0.02, r = 0.66) and Group 2 and Group 1 (p = 0.02; r = 0.72). CONCLUSION : Kinematic differences exist between participants who achieve different observer scores for the FMS DS. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS : While differences in sagittal plane kinematics have been observed in participants scoring high on the FMS DS and participants scoring low, further investigation into the validity of the frontal plane kinematics is warranted, as well as the concurrent validity of the individual scoring criteria.http://www.sajp.co.zaam2024Sports MedicineSDG-03:Good heatlh and well-bein