Key result
Adjustments in injury surveillance methodology, including dedicated staff and electronic reporting, were associated with an apparent increase in overall injury incidence from 2.9 to 7.4 injuries per 1000 hours, driven by increased reporting of mild injuries.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to examine if and how adjustments in injury surveillance recording methodology may have influenced injury rates.
Do adjustments in injury surveillance recording methodology influence reported injury rates in professional male football players?
Observational (n=3,982)
Yes
Do adjustments in injury surveillance recording methodology influence reported injury rates in professional male football players?
Absolute Event Rate: 7.4% vs 2.9%
Changes in injury surveillance methodology significantly impact reported injury rates, highlighting the need for standardized reporting methods in sports medicine.
Surveillance methodology changes may artifactually inflate reported football injury rates; leaves open true incidence trends and need for standardized protocols.
To examine if and how adjustments in injury surveillance recording methodology may have influenced injury rates. Injury and exposure data were collected among professional male players from the Qatar Stars League from the 2008-2009 season to the 2017-2018 season. There have been four iterations of our data collection methods. In the first five seasons, participation in the programme was voluntary. For seasons 6-7, additional dedicated researchers were tasked with contacting the medical teams every month. At the start of season 8, an electronic recording method was instituted. In the final two seasons, injury surveillance participation was further boosted by reinforced encouragement from institutional management. Overall injury incidence increased from season 5 to season 8. Severe injuries have fallen steadily, but slightly over the ten seasons, whereas mild injuries increased dramatically from seasons 5 to 8. The current data suggest that along with the standard metrics (e.g. injury incidence, injury burden) we also need to clearly report the methods by which data were collected and verified in as much detail as possible. We suggest that sports medicine journals should adopt minimum reporting standards and perhaps checklists could be a useful step forward.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tabben et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Football injuries (n=3,982). Adjustments in injury surveillance recording methodology vs. Voluntary reporting (seasons 1-5) was evaluated on Overall injury incidence (injuries per 1000 hours). Adjustments in injury surveillance methodology, including dedicated staff and electronic reporting, were associated with an apparent increase in overall injury incidence from 2.9 to 7.4 injuries per 1000 hours, driven by increased reporting of mild injuries.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: