Effectiveness of an e-health tennis-specific injury prevention programme : randomised controlled trial in adult recreational tennis players

BACKGROUND : Despite reported injury rates of up to 3 per 1000 hours exposure, there are no evidence-based prevention programmes in tennis. PURPOSE : To evaluate the effectiveness of an e-health prevention programme for reducing tennis injury prevalence. STUDY DESIGN : Two-arm, researcher-blinded randomised controlled trial. METHODS : Adult tennis players of all playing levels were randomised in an unsupervised programme lasting 12 weeks (TennisReady group or control group). The primary outcome was the overall injury prevalence over a 16-week period, measured at 2 weekly intervals with the Oslo Sports and Trauma Research Centre questionnaire. Estimates for the primary outcome and associated 95% CIs were obtained using generalised estimating equation models. Secondary outcome scores included prevalence of substantial injuries, overall incidence, adherence and time-loss injuries. RESULTS : A total of 579 (83%) (TennisReady n=286, control n=293) participants were included in the primary analysis. The mean injury prevalence was 37% (95% CI 33% to 42%) in the TennisReady vs 38% (95% CI 34% to 42%) in the control group (adjusted p-value 0.93). The prevalence of substantial injuries was 11% (95% CI 9% to 14%) in the TennisReady vs 12% (95% CI 9% to 15%) in the control group (p value of 0.79). Analysis of the secondary outcome scores showed no difference between groups. The mean prevalence rates between high (8%) and low (92%) adherent groups were 32% (95% CI 23% to 44%) and 37% (95% CI 33% to 42%), respectively (p value 0.36). CONCLUSION : Providing an unsupervised e-health tennis-specific exercise programme did not reduce the injury rates and should not be implemented. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER : NTR6443.http://bjsm.bmj.comhj2023Sports Medicin

Consensus recommendations on training and competing in the heat

Exercising in the heat induces thermoregulatory and other physiological strain that can lead to impairments in endurance exercise capacity. The purpose of this consensus statement is to provide up-to-date recommendations to optimize performance during sporting activities undertaken in hot ambient conditions. The most important intervention one can adopt to reduce physiological strain and optimize performance is to heat acclimatize. Heat acclimatization should comprise repeated exercise–heat exposures over 1–2 weeks. In addition, athletes should initiate competition and training in an euhydrated state and minimize dehydration during exercise. Following the development of commercial cooling systems (e.g., cooling vests), athletes can implement cooling strategies to facilitate heat loss or increase heat storage capacity before training or competing in the heat. Moreover, event organizers should plan for large shaded areas, along with cooling and rehydration facilities, and schedule events in accordance with minimizing the health risks of athletes, especially in mass participation events and during the first hot days of the year. Following the recent examples of the 2008 Olympics and the 2014 FIFA World Cup, sport governing bodies should consider allowing additional (or longer) recovery periods between and during events for hydration and body cooling opportunities when competitions are held in the heat

Methods for epidemiological studies in competitive cycling:an extension of the IOC consensus statement on methods for recording and reporting of epidemiological data on injury and illness in sport 2020

In 2020, the IOC released a consensus statement that provides overall guidelines for the recording and reporting of epidemiological data on injury and illness in sport. Some aspects of this statement need to be further specified on a sport-by-sport basis. To extend the IOC consensus statement on methods for recording and reporting of epidemiological data on injury and illness in sports and to meet the sport-specific requirements of all cycling disciplines regulated by the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI). A panel of 20 experts, all with experience in cycling or cycling medicine, participated in the drafting of this cycling-specific extension of the IOC consensus statement. In preparation, panel members were sent the IOC consensus statement, the first draft of this manuscript and a list of topics to be discussed. The expert panel met in July 2020 for a 1-day video conference to discuss the manuscript and specific topics. The final manuscript was developed in an iterative process involving all panel members. This paper extends the IOC consensus statement to provide cycling-specific recommendations on health problem definitions, mode of onset, injury mechanisms and circumstances, diagnosis classifications, exposure, study population characteristics and data collection methods. Recommendations apply to all UCI cycling disciplines, for both able-bodied cyclists and para-cyclists. The recommendations presented in this consensus statement will improve the consistency and accuracy of future epidemiological studies of injury and illness in cycling

International Olympic Committee consensus statement: Methods for recording and reporting of epidemiological data on injury and illness in sport 2020 (including STROBE Extension for Sport Injury and Illness Surveillance (STROBE-SIIS))

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. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020

How much is too much? (Part 2) International Olympic Committee consensus statement on load in sport and risk of illness

The modern-day athlete participating in elite sports is exposed to high training loads and increasingly saturated competition calendar. Emerging evidence indicates that inappropriate load management is a significant risk factor for acute illness and the overtraining syndrome. The IOC convened an expert group to review the scientific evidence for the relationship of load - including rapid changes in training and competition load, competition calendar congestion, psychological load and travel - and health outcomes in sport. This paper summarises the results linking load to risk of illness and overtraining in athletes, and provides athletes, coaches and support staff with practical guidelines for appropriate load management to reduce the risk of illness and overtraining in sport. These include guidelines for prescription of training and competition load, as well as for monitoring of training, competition and psychological load, athlete well-being and illness. In the process, urgent research priorities were identified

International Olympic Committee consensus statement on pain management in elite athletes

Pain is a common problem among elite athletes and is frequently associated with sport injury. Both pain and injury interfere with the performance of elite athletes. There are currently no evidence-based or consensus-based guidelines for the management of pain in elite athletes. Typically, pain management consists of the provision of analgesics, rest and physical therapy. More appropriately, a treatment strategy should address all contributors to pain including underlying pathophysiology, biomechanical abnormalities and psychosocial issues, and should employ therapies providing optimal benefit and minimal harm. To advance the development of a more standardised, evidence-informed approach to pain management in elite athletes, an IOC Consensus Group critically evaluated the current state of the science and practice of pain management in sport and prepared recommendations for a more unified approach to this important topic

Injury rates in recreational tennis players do not differ between different playing surfaces

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in the prevalence of tennis injuries between the four most common court surfaces in the Netherlands, including hard court, clay, sand-fill artificial grass and red-sand-fill artificial grass. Natural grass was not included in this study. METHODS This was a repeated cross-sectional study over 6 months, involving members of the Royal Netherlands Lawn Tennis Association (KNLTB). A monthly questionnaire was sent to a random sample of 20 000 KNLTB members, stratified by their club's playing surface. The questionnaire included questions on court surface, tennis exposure and physical complaints, using the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Centre questionnaire on health problems. RESULTS A total of 3656 (18%) of the 20 000 invited members completed at least one of the monthly questionnaires [mean age 49 years (15)]. A total of 4047 injuries were reported by 1957 respondents. Of these injuries, 3246 (80%) were overuse and 801 (20%) were acute. There were no statistically significant differences in injury prevalence between groups who played primarily on any one of the four court surfaces. However, players who played on multiple surfaces had a higher injury prevalence, particularly of overuse injuries, than those who primarily played on one court surface. Compared with the other court surfaces, there was a higher prevalence of lower limb overuse injuries when playing on hard court. CONCLUSION There is no significant difference in the overall prevalence of injury on clay, hard court, sand-fill artificial grass and red-sand-fill artificial grass