How do sports injury epidemiological outcomes vary depending on athletes' response rates to a weekly online questionnaire? An analysis of 39-week follow-up from 391 athletics (track and field) athletes

OBJECTIVE

To explore how sports injury epidemiological outcomes (i.e., prevalence, average prevalence, incidence, burden, and time to first injury) vary depending on the response rates to a weekly online self-reported questionnaire for athletes.

METHODS

Weekly information on athletics injuries and exposure from 391 athletics (track and field) athletes was prospectively collected over 39 weeks (control group of the PREVATHLE randomized controlled trial) using an online self-reported questionnaire. The data were used to calculate sports injury epidemiological outcomes (i.e., prevalence, average prevalence, incidence, burden, and time to first injury) for sub-groups with different minimum individual athletes' response rates (i.e., from at least 100%, at least 97%, at least 95%, … to at least 0% response rate). We then calculated the relative variation between each sub-group and the sub-group with a 100% response rate as a reference. A substantial variation was considered when the relative variation was greater than one SD or 95% CI of the respective epidemiological outcome calculated in the sub-group with a 100% response rate.

RESULTS

Of 15 249 expected weekly questionnaires, 7209 were completed and returned, resulting in an overall response rate of 47.3%. The individual athletes' response rates ranged from 0% (n = 51) to 100% (n = 100). The prevalence, average weekly prevalence, and time to first injury only varied substantially for the sub-groups below a 5%, 10% and 18% minimum individual response rate, respectively. The incidence and injury burden showed substantial variations for all sub-groups with a response rate below 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Epidemiological outcomes varied depending on the minimum individual athletes' response rate, with injury prevalence, average weekly prevalence, and time to first injury varying less than injury incidence and injury burden. This highlights the need to take into account the individual response rate when calculating epidemiological outcomes, and determining the optimal study-specific cut-offs of the minimum individual response rate needed.

Perceptions and beliefs on sports injury prediction as an injury risk reduction strategy: An online survey on elite athletics (track and field) athletes, coaches, and health professionals

OBJECTIVES

To explore perceptions and beliefs of elite athletics (track and field) athletes, coaches, and health professionals, towards the use of injury prediction as an injury risk reduction strategy.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHOD

During the 2022 European Athletics Championships in Munich, registered athletes, coaches, and health professionals were asked to complete an online questionnaire on their perceptions and beliefs of injury prediction use as an injury risk reduction strategy. The perceived level of interest, intent to use, help, potential stress (psychological impact) and dissemination were assessed by a score from 0 to 100.

RESULTS

We collected 54 responses from 17 countries. Elite athletics stakeholders expressed a perceived level of interest, intent to use, and help of injury prediction of (mean ± SD) 85 ± 16, 84 ± 16, and 85 ± 15, respectively. The perceived level of potential stress was 41 ± 33 (range from 0 to 100), with an important inter-individual variability in each elite athletics stakeholder's category.

CONCLUSIONS

This was the first study investigating the perceptions and beliefs of elite athletics stakeholders regarding the use of injury prediction as an injury risk reduction strategy. Regardless of the stakeholders, there was a high perceived level of interest, intent to use and help reported in this potential strategy.

Chondroitin sulfate in osteoarthritis of the knee: a prospective, double blind, placebo controlled multicenter clinical study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of chondroitin sulfate (CS) 1 g/day per os compared to placebo, in a double blind, randomized, parallel group study, with 3 months treatment followed by a 3 month posttreatment period, in patients with femorotibial osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

The main criterion was the functional handicap assessed by Lequesne's algofunctional index (AFI). Secondary efficacy criteria were: self-assessed pain with activity and at rest, self-assessed impact of OA on daily living, patient and physician assessed overall change in patient state since the previous visit, and daily NSAID and analgesic consumption, all evaluated monthly. The main analysis was performed on the intent-to-treat (ITT) population at treatment endpoint compared to baseline (Day 0).

RESULTS

The ITT efficacy data set comprised 130 patients (63 in CS group and 67 in placebo group). At treatment endpoint, the AFI showed greater but nonsignificant improvement in the CS than in the placebo group. Improvement became significant (p = 0.02) in the completer population (n = 114). In the ITT population, all variables tended towards greater improvement in the CS than the placebo group. In the completer population, pain at rest also significantly decreased in the CS group compared to the placebo group (p = 0.03), and, one month after treatment, CS had a significantly higher persistent effect than placebo on the AFI (p = 0.01), pain with activity (p = 0.001), physician assessed patient state (p = 0.05), and most other efficacy criteria. Adverse event rates did not differ significantly.

CONCLUSION

We observed a trend towards efficacy of CS 1 g/day compared to placebo with good tolerability after 3 month treatment, and persistent efficacy one month posttreatment. Further investigations are required to confirm this trend.