Marathon racing in cool conditions is generally safe, with a low rate of severe medical encounters.
Supports low severe risk in cool marathons; extends observational data but should not yet change practice.
OBJECTIVE: To summarize the medical encounters (injury/illness) for runners and the meteorologic data collected in the medical area of a large marathon race. DESIGN: Prospectively transcribed medical records were analyzed for encounter rate, injury/illness type, treatment rendered, and outcomes. The environmental conditions for each race day are compared with injury/illness rates and types. SETTING: An urban 42-km marathon located at 44 degrees 53' N latitude and 93 degrees 13' W longitude, scheduled on the first Sunday of October with an early morning start time. PARTICIPANTS: 81,277 entrants in the Twin Cities Marathon from 1982 to 1994. MAIN RESULTS: The start temperature range was -4 to 16 degrees C and the 4-h temperature range was 5-20 degrees C. The average dew point was 3 degrees C at the start and 4 degrees C at 4 h. The finish area medical encounter rates for marathon runners were 18.9 per 1000 entrants and 25.3 per 1000 finishers. Mild injury/illness accounted for 90% of finish line medical encounters. Runners presented with exercise-associated collapse (59%), skin problems (21%), musculoskeletal problems (17%), and other medical problems (3%). Only 112 runners received intravenous fluids and 30 runners were transferred to emergency medical facilities. One death occurred in 1989. CONCLUSIONS: Marathon racing in cool conditions is a safe activity and most of the medical encounters are of minor severity. An early morning start time contributes to a cool racing environment and a low injury rate. More than 99.9% of runners who finish this race leave the finish area without hospital or emergency room care. The injury/illness profile can be used to tailor medical care at the finish area of marathons.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
William O. Roberts (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: