Dataset Information

Diagnoses and time to recovery among injured recreational runners in the RUN CLEVER trial.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:The purpose of the present study was to describe the incidence proportion of different types of running-related injuries (RRI) among recreational runners and to determine their time to recovery. METHODS:A sub-analysis of the injured runners included in the 839-person, 24-week randomized trial named Run Clever. During follow-up, the participants reported levels of pain in different anatomical areas on a weekly basis. In case injured, runners attended a clinical examination at a physiotherapist, who provided a diagnosis, e.g., medial tibial stress syndrome (MTSS), Achilles tendinopathy (AT), patellofemoral pain (PFP), iliotibial band syndrome (ITBS) and plantar fasciopathy (PF). The diagnose-specific injury proportions (IP) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using descriptive statistics. The time to recovery was defined as the time from the first registration of pain until total pain relief in the same anatomical area. It was reported as medians and interquartile range (IQR) if possible. RESULTS:A total of 140 runners were injured at least once leading to a 24-week cumulative injury proportion of 32% [95% CI: 26%; 37%]. The diagnoses with the highest incidence proportion were MTSS (IP = 16% [95% CI: 9.3%; 22.9%], AT (IP = 8.9% [95% CI: 3.6%; 14.2%], PFP (IP = 8% [95% CI: 3.0%; 13.1%]. The median time to recovery for all types of injuries was 56 days (IQR = 70 days). Diagnose-specific time-to-recoveries included 70 days (IQR = 89 days) for MTSS, 56 days (IQR = 165 days) for AT, 49 days (IQR = 63 days) for PFP. CONCLUSION:The most common running injuries among recreational runners were MTSS followed by AT, PFP, ITBS and PF. In total, 77 injured participants recovered their RRI and the median time to recovery for all types of injuries was 56 days and MTSS was the diagnosis with the longest median time to recovery, 70 days.

SUBMITTER: Mulvad B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6193581 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Diagnoses and time to recovery among injured recreational runners in the RUN CLEVER trial.

Mulvad Benjamin B Nielsen Rasmus Oestergaard RO Lind Martin M Ramskov Daniel D

PloS one 20181012 10

<h4>Purpose</h4>The purpose of the present study was to describe the incidence proportion of different types of running-related injuries (RRI) among recreational runners and to determine their time to recovery.<h4>Methods</h4>A sub-analysis of the injured runners included in the 839-person, 24-week randomized trial named Run Clever. During follow-up, the participants reported levels of pain in different anatomical areas on a weekly basis. In case injured, runners attended a clinical examination ...[more]

PMID: 30312310

Similar Datasets

Project description:Injury incidence and prevalence in running populations have been investigated and documented in several studies. However, knowledge about injury etiology and prevention is needed. Training errors in running are modifiable risk factors and people engaged in recreational running need evidence-based running schedules to minimize the risk of injury. The existing literature on running volume and running intensity and the development of injuries show conflicting results. This may be related to previously applied study designs, methods used to quantify the performed running and the statistical analysis of the collected data. The aim of the Run Clever trial is to investigate if a focus on running intensity compared with a focus on running volume in a running schedule influences the overall injury risk differently.The Run Clever trial is a randomized trial with a 24-week follow-up. Healthy recreational runners between 18 and 65 years and with an average of 1-3 running sessions per week the past 6 months are included. Participants are randomized into two intervention groups: Running schedule-I and Schedule-V. Schedule-I emphasizes a progression in running intensity by increasing the weekly volume of running at a hard pace, while Schedule-V emphasizes a progression in running volume, by increasing the weekly overall volume. Data on the running performed is collected by GPS. Participants who sustain running-related injuries are diagnosed by a diagnostic team of physiotherapists using standardized diagnostic criteria. The members of the diagnostic team are blinded. The study design, procedures and informed consent were approved by the Ethics Committee Northern Denmark Region (N-20140069).The Run Clever trial will provide insight into possible differences in injury risk between running schedules emphasizing either running intensity or running volume. The risk of sustaining volume- and intensity-related injuries will be compared in the two intervention groups using a competing risks approach. The trial will hopefully result in a better understanding of the relationship between the running performed and possible differences in running-related injury risk and the injuries developed.Clinical Trials NCT02349373 - January 23, 2015.

Project description:This cross-sectional study aimed to obtain fundamental knowledge about pain during a marathon run. During the first seven months of 2007, announcements on websites of interest to marathon runners were used to recruit participants. A total of 1,251 runners (550 female runners) completed a 41-question online survey about the location and intensity of their primary pain during their last marathon and potentially related variables [perception of effort during the marathon, number of prior marathons run, typical pain intensity during training runs, percentage of training days with run-induced pain, highest intensity pain ever experienced]. Pain location was selected from a list of 27 specified body sites covering the entire body. Kilometer at which pain first occurred indexed pain threshold. Pain intensity at the primary location of pain was measured with a standardized, well-validated 0-10 pain intensity scale. Pearson correlations and multiple regression quantified the associations between average pain intensity and other variables. Sex-related differences in pain were tested using independent t-tests. Effort ratings (6-20) were added as a covariate in an ANCOVA to test if perceived effort accounted for possible sex-related differences in pain. Based on the available research, it was hypothesized that: (i) most runners would report moderate intensity pain, (ii) pain would be associated with both exercise intensity during the marathon and pain during training, and (iii) after adjusting for expected sex-related differences in perceived effort, females would experience pain earlier and rate the pain intensity as higher. All but two runners (99.8%) reported pain during a marathon, and most frequently in the anterior/medial thigh (17.1%), hamstring (10%), and calf (9.3%) locations. Pain threshold occurred at 25.3 ± 9.8 km (15.7 ± 6.1 miles) and the overall pain intensity of the run was 5.26 ± 2.45. No sex-related pain differences were found. Overall pain intensity during a marathon was significantly associated with: pain intensity during training runs (r = 0.39), percentage of training days with run-induced pain (r = 0.23), highest intensity pain ever experienced (r = 0.23), number of prior marathons (r = -0.18), and intensity of effort (r = 0.11) (all P < 0.001). Most runners experience moderate to very strong intensity pain during a marathon; the pain was independent of biological sex, and the pain is weakly associated with marathon race experience, pain during training, race effort, and the highest intensity of pain ever experienced.

Dataset Information

Diagnoses and time to recovery among injured recreational runners in the RUN CLEVER trial.

Publications

Diagnoses and time to recovery among injured recreational runners in the RUN CLEVER trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets