Background Running-related injuries (RRIs) can be considered the primary enemy of runners. Most literature on injury prediction and prevention overlooks the mental aspects of overtraining and under-recovery, despite their potential role in injury prediction and prevention. Consequently, knowledge on the role of mental aspects in RRIs is lacking. Objective To investigate mental aspects of overtraining and under-recovery by means of an online injury prevention programme. Methods and analysis The ‘Take a Mental Break!’ study is a randomised controlled trial with a 12 month follow-up. After completing a web-based baseline survey, half and full marathon runners were randomly assigned to the intervention group or the control group. Participants of the intervention group obtained access to an online injury prevention programme, consisting of a running-related smartphone application. This app provided the participants of the intervention group with information on how to prevent overtraining and RRIs with special attention to mental aspects. The primary outcome measure is any self-reported RRI over the past 12 months. Secondary outcome measures include vigour, fatigue, sleep and perceived running performance. Regression analysis will be conducted to investigate whether the injury prevention programme has led to a lower prevalence of RRIs, better health and improved perceived running performance. Ethics and dissemination The Medical Ethics Committee of the University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands, has exempted the current study from ethical approval (reference number: NL64342.041.17). Results of the study will be communicated through scientific articles in peer-reviewed journals, scientific reports and presentations on scientific conferences.
DOCUMENT
The aim of this study is to investigate the predictivevalue of landing stability and technique togain insight into risk factors for ankle and kneeinjuries in indoor team sport players. Seventyfivemale and female basketball, volleyball orkorfball players were screened by measuringlanding stability after a single-leg jump landingand landing technique during a repeated countermovement jump by detailed 3-dimensional kinematicsand kinetics. During the season 11 acuteankle injuries were reported along with 6 acuteand 7 overuse knee injuries by the teams’ physicaltherapist. Logistic regression analysis showedless landing stability in the forward and diagonaljump direction (OR 1.01–1.10, p ≤ 0.05) in playerswho sustained an acute ankle injury. Furthermorelanding technique with a greater ankle dorsiflexionmoment increased the risk for acuteankle injury (OR 2.16, p ≤ 0.05). A smaller kneeflexion moment and greater vertical groundreaction force increased the risk of an overuseknee injury (OR 0.29 and 1.13 respectively,p ≤ 0.05). Less one-legged landing stability andsuboptimal landing technique were shown inplayers sustaining an acute ankle and overuseknee injury compared to healthy players. Determiningboth landing stability and technique mayfurther guide injury prevention programs.
DOCUMENT
Objectives To report (1) the injury incidence in recreational runners in preparation for a 8-km or 16-km running event and (2) which factors were associated withan increased injury risk. Methods Prospective cohort study in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Participants (n=5327) received a baseline survey to determine event distance (8 km or 16 km), main sport, running experience, previous injuries, recent overuse injuries and personal characteristics. Three days after the race, they received a follow-up survey to determine duration of training period, running distance per week, training hours, injuries during preparation and use oftechnology. Univariate and multivariate regression models were applied to examine potential risk factors for injuries. Results 1304 (24.5%) participants completed both surveys. After excluding participants with current health problems, no signed informed consent, missing or incorrect data, we included 706 (13.3%) participants. In total, 142 participants (20.1%) reported an injury during preparation for the event. Univariate analyses (OR: 1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.4) and multivariate analyses (OR: 1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.5) showed that injury history was a significant risk factor for running injuries (Nagelkerke R-square=0.06). Conclusion An injury incidence for recreational runners in preparation for a running event was 20%. A previous injury was the only significant risk factor for runningrelated injuries.
DOCUMENT
