Christina L Ekegren1, Belinda J Gabbe2, Caroline F Finch3. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Alfred Centre, 99 Commercial Rd, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia. christina.ekegren@monash.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Alfred Centre, 99 Commercial Rd, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia. 3. Australian Centre for Research into Injury in Sport and its Prevention, Federation University Australia, Ballarat, VIC, 3353, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data from sports injury surveillance systems are a prerequisite to the development and evaluation of injury prevention strategies. This review aimed to identify ongoing sports injury surveillance systems and determine whether there are gaps in our understanding of injuries in certain sport settings. A secondary aim was to determine which of the included surveillance systems have evaluated the quality of their data, a key factor in determining their usefulness. METHODS: A systematic search was carried out to identify (1) publications presenting methodological details of sports injury surveillance systems within clubs and organisations; and (2) publications describing quality evaluations and the quality of data from these systems. Data extracted included methodological details of the surveillance systems, methods used to evaluate data quality, and results of these evaluations. RESULTS: Following literature search and review, a total of 15 sports injury surveillance systems were identified. Data relevant to each aim were summarised descriptively. Most systems were found to exist within professional and elite sports. Publications concerning data quality were identified for seven (47%) systems. Validation of system data through comparison with alternate sources has been undertaken for only four systems (27%). CONCLUSIONS: This review identified a shortage of ongoing injury surveillance data from amateur and community sport settings and limited information about the quality of data in professional and elite settings. More surveillance systems are needed across a range of sport settings, as are standards for data quality reporting. These efforts will enable better monitoring of sports injury trends and the development of sports safety strategies.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data from sports injury surveillance systems are a prerequisite to the development and evaluation of injury prevention strategies. This review aimed to identify ongoing sports injury surveillance systems and determine whether there are gaps in our understanding of injuries in certain sport settings. A secondary aim was to determine which of the included surveillance systems have evaluated the quality of their data, a key factor in determining their usefulness. METHODS: A systematic search was carried out to identify (1) publications presenting methodological details of sports injury surveillance systems within clubs and organisations; and (2) publications describing quality evaluations and the quality of data from these systems. Data extracted included methodological details of the surveillance systems, methods used to evaluate data quality, and results of these evaluations. RESULTS: Following literature search and review, a total of 15 sports injury surveillance systems were identified. Data relevant to each aim were summarised descriptively. Most systems were found to exist within professional and elite sports. Publications concerning data quality were identified for seven (47%) systems. Validation of system data through comparison with alternate sources has been undertaken for only four systems (27%). CONCLUSIONS: This review identified a shortage of ongoing injury surveillance data from amateur and community sport settings and limited information about the quality of data in professional and elite settings. More surveillance systems are needed across a range of sport settings, as are standards for data quality reporting. These efforts will enable better monitoring of sports injury trends and the development of sports safety strategies.
Authors: Andrew E Lincoln; Shane V Caswell; Jon L Almquist; Reginald E Dunn; Joseph B Norris; Richard Y Hinton Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2011-01-29 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Christopher S Ahmad; Randall W Dick; Edward Snell; Nick D Kenney; Frank C Curriero; Keshia Pollack; John P Albright; Bert R Mandelbaum Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2014-04-11 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Richard Y Hinton; Andrew E Lincoln; Jon L Almquist; Wiemi A Douoguih; Krishn M Sharma Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2005-07-06 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Matthew C Hess; David I Swedler; Christine S Collins; Brent A Ponce; Eugene W Brabston Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2020-01-02 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Karen G Roos; Kristen L Kucera; Yvonne M Golightly; Joseph B Myers; Wayne D Rosamond; Stephen W Marshall Journal: Athl Train Sports Health Care Date: 2019-03-25
Authors: Stuart E Willick; Daniel M Cushman; Joshua Klatt; Matthew Brobeck; Chris Spencer; Masaru Teramoto Journal: J Sci Med Sport Date: 2020-05-26 Impact factor: 4.597
Authors: Matthew Cross; Sean Williams; Simon P T Kemp; Colin Fuller; Aileen Taylor; John Brooks; Grant Trewartha; Keith Stokes Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2018-03-19