Dataset Information

Illness prevalence and symptoms in youth floorball players: a one-season prospective cohort study involving 471 players.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To describe weekly illness prevalence and illness symptoms by sex in youth floorball players during one season.

Design

Prospective cohort study.

Setting

Players who were registered to play community level floorball during the 2017-2018 season (26 weeks) in two provinces in southern Sweden.

Participants

471 youth players aged 12-17 years. Mean (SD) age for 329 male players 13.3 (1.0) years and 142 female players 13.7 (1.5) years.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

Weekly self-reported illness prevalence and illness symptoms according to the 2020 International Olympic Committee's consensus recommendations.

Results

61% of youth floorball players reported at least one illness week during the season, with an average weekly illness prevalence of 12% (95% CI 10.8% to 12.3%). The prevalence was slightly higher among females (13%, 95% CI 11.6% to 14.3%) than males (11%, 95% CI 9.9% to 11.7%), prevalence rate ratio 1.20 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.37, p=0.009). In total, 49% (53% male, 43% female) of illness reports indicated that the player could not participate in floorball (time loss), with a mean (SD) absence of 2.0 (1.7) days per illness week. Fever (30%), sore throat (16%) and cough (14%) were the most common symptoms. Female players more often reported difficulty in breathing/tight airways and fainting, and male players more often reported coughing, feeling tired/feverish and headache. Illness prevalence was highest in the peak winter months (late January/February) reaching 15%-18% during this period.

Conclusions

Our novel findings of the illness prevalence and symptoms in youth floorball may help direct prevention strategies. Athletes, coaches, parents and support personnel need to be educated about risk mitigation strategies.

Trial registration number

NCT03309904.

SUBMITTER: Perera NKP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8671975 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThere is limited research investigating injury and illness among professional basketball players during their rookie season. By improving the understanding of injury incidence and risk specific to rookie players, sports medicine clinicians may be able to further individualize injury mitigation programs that address the unique needs of rookie players.ObjectiveTo compare incidence and rate ratio (RR) of injury and illness among professional National Basketball Association (NBA) players in their rookie season with veteran players and to explore the association of sustaining an injury rookie season with career longevity.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study used an online data repository and extracted publicly available data about NBA players between the 2007 and 2008 season to the 2018 and 2019 season. Available data for initial injury and all subsequent injuries were extracted during this time frame.ExposuresInjury and illness based on injury status during the rookie season of professional NBA players.Main outcomes and measuresInjury and illness incidence and RR. Association of injury during the rookie season with career longevity was assessed via Poisson regressions.ResultsOf the 12 basketball seasons analyzed, 904 NBA players were included (mean [SD] age, 24.6 [3.9] years; body mass index, 24.8 [1.8]). The injury and illness incidence for rookie players was 14.28 per 1000 athlete game exposures (AGEs). Among all body regions, ankle injuries had the greatest injury incidence among players injured during their rookie season (3.17 [95% CI, 3.15-3.19] per 1000 AGEs). Rookie athletes demonstrated higher RR compared with veterans across multiple regions of the body (ankle: 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.52; foot/toe: 1.29; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.61; shoulder/arm/elbow: 1.43; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.77; head/neck: 1.21; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.81; concussions: 2.39; 95% CI, 1.89 to 2.90; illness: 1.14; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.40), and demonstrated a higher rate of initial injuries compared with veteran players (1.41; 95% CI, 1.29 to 1.53). Players who sustained an injury rookie season demonstrated an unadjusted decrease in total seasons played (-0.4 [95% CI, -0.5 to -0.3] log years; P < .001), but this decrease was not observed within adjusted analysis (0.1 [95% CI, -0.1 to 0.2] log years; P = .36).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, rookie athletes demonstrated the highest injury incidence at the ankle and increased RR across multiple regions. These findings may reflect differences in preseason conditioning or load variables impacting rookie athletes and warrant further investigation. Future research is needed to determine the association of cumulative injury burden vs a singular injury event on career longevity.

Project description:BackgroundYouth participation in team ball sports is associated with a risk of both acute and gradual onset injuries but today there are several efficacious injury prevention exercise programmes (IPEPs). However, there is limited research about how to implement those programmes and the perceived barriers and facilitators among end-users.ObjectiveTo investigate perceptions of the IPEP Knee Control and facilitators and barriers to programme use among coaches and youth floorball players, and explore factors associated with planned maintenance of Knee Control.MethodsThis cross-sectional study is a sub-analysis of data from the intervention group of a cluster randomised controlled trial. Perceptions about Knee Control and facilitators and barriers to programme use were evaluated with surveys pre-intervention and post-season. 246 youth floorball players aged 12-17 years, and 35 coaches that reported no use of IPEPs during the preceding year were included. Descriptive statistics and univariate and multivariate ordinal logistic regression models were undertaken with the dependent variables: coaches' planned maintenance and players' opinions of maintenance of Knee Control. Independent variables were perceptions, facilitators and barriers regarding use of Knee Control and other potential influencing factors.Results88% of the players believed that Knee Control can reduce injury risk. Common facilitators to Knee Control use among coaches were support, education and high player motivation, and common barriers were that injury prevention training was time-consuming, lack of space to execute the exercises and lack of player motivation. Players who planned to maintain use of Knee Control had higher outcome expectancies and belief in one's ability to use Knee Control (action self-efficacy). Coaches who planned to maintain Knee Control had higher action self-efficacy and to a lesser extent considered that Knee Control takes too much time.ConclusionsSupport, education, and high player motivation are key facilitators, while lack of time and space for injury prevention training and boring exercises are key barriers for coaches and players to use Knee Control. High action self-efficacy among coaches and players seems to be a prerequisite for maintained use of IPEPs.

Project description:PurposeEvaluate team and player compliance with the Knee Control injury prevention exercise programme, study the association between player compliance and injury rates, and compare coach demographics, baseline prevention expectancies, and programme utilisation between teams with high and low compliance.MethodsProspective one-season cohort study based on a cluster randomised controlled trial on 301 (107 female) floorball players aged 12-17 years. Floorball exposure and injuries were self-reported weekly by players using the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center questionnaire. Team and player compliance to Knee Control was reported monthly by coaches. Additionally, coaches answered pre- and post-season surveys. Teams were divided into a high (≥ 80%) or low (< 80%) compliance group based on their use of Knee Control during the season. Players were divided into three compliance groups based on their average weekly number of Knee Control sessions; high (≥ 2 sessions), intermediate (≥ 1 to < 2 sessions), and low dose (< 1 session).ResultsMean team compliance for the high and low compliance groups were 95% (range 82-100) and 50% (range 13-66), respectively. Mean ± SD weekly Knee Control dose in the three player compliance groups were 2.4 ± 0.3, 1.4 ± 0.3, and 0.7 ± 0.3 sessions, respectively. There were no differences in total injury incidence between the player compliance groups, but players in the high-dose group had a 35% lower prevalence of injuries overall [adjusted prevalence rate ratio (PRR) 0.65, 95% CI 0.48-0.89] and 60% lower prevalence of substantial injuries (adjusted PRR 0.40, 95% CI 0.26-0.61) compared with the low-dose group. Male players in the high-dose group had consistently lower injury incidence and prevalence, while no between compliance group differences were seen in female players. There were no differences in sex, years of coaching experience, or baseline prevention expectancies in general between coaches for teams in the high vs. low compliance groups, but teams in the high compliance group had a better utilisation fidelity.ConclusionThere was a clear dose-response relationship between more frequent Knee Control use and lower injury rates in male floorball players, but not in female players. Teams with higher compliance also showed a better utilisation fidelity with the programme.Level of evidenceLevel II.

Project description:This study explored youth floorball players' and coaches' perspectives on using the injury prevention exercise programmes (IPEPs) Knee Control or Knee Control+ (Knee Control programmes) and how to overcome barriers to programme use. We used a qualitative design with eight semistructured focus group discussions, six with players, 11-17 years old (n =42) and two with coaches (n =12). Data analysis followed the principles of qualitative content analysis. Three main categories emerged: challenges related to preventive training, promoting factors and solutions to facilitate the use of preventive training. To overcome barriers, players and coaches gave examples of how to tailor preventive programmes, such as adding joyful sport specific components. Player-perceived improved performance, with increased strength and speed from the preventive training, could be a promoting factor to increase motivation and enable IPEP use. Players and coaches offered examples of how to adapt and progress the preventive training by progressing gradually and choosing exercises that fit the team. Coaches emphasised that preventive training is important but difficult to prioritise in time-limited training sessions. Coaches' suggestions to overcome barriers were through collaboration and support from other coaches, to start using the IPEP at an early age, to keep it simple and motivating the players with, for example, positive role models. Players found the Knee Control exercises boring but necessary for injury prevention. Sometimes, coaches felt uncertain of their competence to use the Knee Control programmes and wished for support from the federation, club and other coaches. Players and coaches shared ideas on how to overcome barriers to IPEP use, such as to increase players' motivation, having a good structure, setting up routines for preventive training and to tailor the preventive training to the team. These findings can be used to further develop practical workshops and recommendations for programme use for players and coaches in youth team ball sports.