Scientific evidence is just the starting point : A generalizable process for developing sports injury prevention interventions
- Donaldson, Alex, Lloyd, David, Gabbe, Belinda, Cook, Jill, Young, Warren, White, Peta, Finch, Caroline
- Authors: Donaldson, Alex , Lloyd, David , Gabbe, Belinda , Cook, Jill , Young, Warren , White, Peta , Finch, Caroline
- Date: 2016
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Journal of Sport and Health Science Vol. 5, no. 3 (2016), p. 334-341
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/1058737
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565907
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background: The 2 most cited sports injury prevention research frameworks incorporate intervention development, yet little guidance is available in the sports science literature on how to undertake this complex process. This paper presents a generalizable process for developing implementable sports injury prevention interventions, including a case study applying the process to develop a lower limb injury prevention exercise training program (FootyFirst) for community Australian football. Methods: The intervention development process is underpinned by 2 complementary premises: (1) that evidence-based practice integrates the best available scientific evidence with practitioner expertise and end user values and (2) that research evidence alone is insufficient to develop implementable interventions. Results: The generalizable 6-step intervention development process involves (1) compiling research evidence, clinical experience, and knowledge of the implementation context; (2) consulting with experts; (3) engaging with end users; (4) testing the intervention; (5) using theory; and (6) obtaining feedback from early implementers. Following each step, intervention content and presentation should be revised to ensure that the final intervention includes evidence-informed content that is likely to be adopted, properly implemented, and sustained over time by the targeted intervention deliverers. For FootyFirst, this process involved establishing a multidisciplinary intervention development group, conducting 2 targeted literature reviews, undertaking an online expert consensus process, conducting focus groups with program end users, testing the program multiple times in different contexts, and obtaining feedback from early implementers of the program. Conclusion: This systematic yet pragmatic and iterative intervention development process is potentially applicable to any injury prevention topic across all sports settings and levels. It will guide researchers wishing to undertake intervention development.
- Description: Background: The 2 most cited sports injury prevention research frameworks incorporate intervention development, yet little guidance is available in the sports science literature on how to undertake this complex process. This paper presents a generalizable process for developing implementable sports injury prevention interventions, including a case study applying the process to develop a lower limb injury prevention exercise training program (FootyFirst) for community Australian football. Methods: The intervention development process is underpinned by 2 complementary premises: (1) that evidence-based practice integrates the best available scientific evidence with practitioner expertise and end user values and (2) that research evidence alone is insufficient to develop implementable interventions. Results: The generalizable 6-step intervention development process involves (1) compiling research evidence, clinical experience, and knowledge of the implementation context; (2) consulting with experts; (3) engaging with end users; (4) testing the intervention; (5) using theory; and (6) obtaining feedback from early implementers. Following each step, intervention content and presentation should be revised to ensure that the final intervention includes evidence-informed content that is likely to be adopted, properly implemented, and sustained over time by the targeted intervention deliverers. For FootyFirst, this process involved establishing a multidisciplinary intervention development group, conducting 2 targeted literature reviews, undertaking an online expert consensus process, conducting focus groups with program end users, testing the program multiple times in different contexts, and obtaining feedback from early implementers of the program. Conclusion: This systematic yet pragmatic and iterative intervention development process is potentially applicable to any injury prevention topic across all sports settings and levels. It will guide researchers wishing to undertake intervention development. (C) 2016 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Shanghai University of Sport.
- Authors: Donaldson, Alex , Lloyd, David , Gabbe, Belinda , Cook, Jill , Young, Warren , White, Peta , Finch, Caroline
- Date: 2016
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Journal of Sport and Health Science Vol. 5, no. 3 (2016), p. 334-341
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/1058737
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565907
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background: The 2 most cited sports injury prevention research frameworks incorporate intervention development, yet little guidance is available in the sports science literature on how to undertake this complex process. This paper presents a generalizable process for developing implementable sports injury prevention interventions, including a case study applying the process to develop a lower limb injury prevention exercise training program (FootyFirst) for community Australian football. Methods: The intervention development process is underpinned by 2 complementary premises: (1) that evidence-based practice integrates the best available scientific evidence with practitioner expertise and end user values and (2) that research evidence alone is insufficient to develop implementable interventions. Results: The generalizable 6-step intervention development process involves (1) compiling research evidence, clinical experience, and knowledge of the implementation context; (2) consulting with experts; (3) engaging with end users; (4) testing the intervention; (5) using theory; and (6) obtaining feedback from early implementers. Following each step, intervention content and presentation should be revised to ensure that the final intervention includes evidence-informed content that is likely to be adopted, properly implemented, and sustained over time by the targeted intervention deliverers. For FootyFirst, this process involved establishing a multidisciplinary intervention development group, conducting 2 targeted literature reviews, undertaking an online expert consensus process, conducting focus groups with program end users, testing the program multiple times in different contexts, and obtaining feedback from early implementers of the program. Conclusion: This systematic yet pragmatic and iterative intervention development process is potentially applicable to any injury prevention topic across all sports settings and levels. It will guide researchers wishing to undertake intervention development.
- Description: Background: The 2 most cited sports injury prevention research frameworks incorporate intervention development, yet little guidance is available in the sports science literature on how to undertake this complex process. This paper presents a generalizable process for developing implementable sports injury prevention interventions, including a case study applying the process to develop a lower limb injury prevention exercise training program (FootyFirst) for community Australian football. Methods: The intervention development process is underpinned by 2 complementary premises: (1) that evidence-based practice integrates the best available scientific evidence with practitioner expertise and end user values and (2) that research evidence alone is insufficient to develop implementable interventions. Results: The generalizable 6-step intervention development process involves (1) compiling research evidence, clinical experience, and knowledge of the implementation context; (2) consulting with experts; (3) engaging with end users; (4) testing the intervention; (5) using theory; and (6) obtaining feedback from early implementers. Following each step, intervention content and presentation should be revised to ensure that the final intervention includes evidence-informed content that is likely to be adopted, properly implemented, and sustained over time by the targeted intervention deliverers. For FootyFirst, this process involved establishing a multidisciplinary intervention development group, conducting 2 targeted literature reviews, undertaking an online expert consensus process, conducting focus groups with program end users, testing the program multiple times in different contexts, and obtaining feedback from early implementers of the program. Conclusion: This systematic yet pragmatic and iterative intervention development process is potentially applicable to any injury prevention topic across all sports settings and levels. It will guide researchers wishing to undertake intervention development. (C) 2016 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Shanghai University of Sport.
Medical-attention injuries in community australian football: A review of 30 years of surveillance data from treatment sources
- Ekegren, Christina, Gabbe, Belinda, Finch, Caroline
- Authors: Ekegren, Christina , Gabbe, Belinda , Finch, Caroline
- Date: 2015
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine Vol. 25, no. 2 (2015), p. 162-172
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objective: In recent reports, Australian football has outranked other team sports in the frequency of hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) presentations. Understanding the profile of these and other "medical-attention" injuries is vital for developing preventive strategies that can reduce health costs. The objective of this review was to describe the frequency and profile of Australian football injuries presenting for medical attention. Data Sources: A systematic search was carried out to identify peer-reviewed articles and reports presenting original data about Australian football injuries from treatment sources (hospitals, EDs, and health-care clinics). Data extracted included injury frequency and rate, body region, and nature and mechanism of injury. Main Results: Following literature search and review, 12 publications were included. In most studies, Australian football contributed the greatest number of injuries out of any sport or recreation activity. Hospitals and EDs reported a higher proportion of upper limb than lower limb injuries, whereas the opposite was true for sports medicine clinics. In hospitals, fractures and dislocations were most prevalent out of all injuries. In EDs and clinics, sprains/strains were most common in adults and superficial injuries were predominant in children. Most injuries resulted from contact with other players or falling. Conclusions: The upper limb was the most commonly injured body region for Australian football presentations to hospitals and EDs. Strategies to prevent upper limb injuries could reduce associated public health costs. However, to understand the full extent of the injury problem in football, treatment source surveillance systems should be supplemented with other datasets, including community club-based collections. © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
- Authors: Ekegren, Christina , Gabbe, Belinda , Finch, Caroline
- Date: 2015
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine Vol. 25, no. 2 (2015), p. 162-172
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objective: In recent reports, Australian football has outranked other team sports in the frequency of hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) presentations. Understanding the profile of these and other "medical-attention" injuries is vital for developing preventive strategies that can reduce health costs. The objective of this review was to describe the frequency and profile of Australian football injuries presenting for medical attention. Data Sources: A systematic search was carried out to identify peer-reviewed articles and reports presenting original data about Australian football injuries from treatment sources (hospitals, EDs, and health-care clinics). Data extracted included injury frequency and rate, body region, and nature and mechanism of injury. Main Results: Following literature search and review, 12 publications were included. In most studies, Australian football contributed the greatest number of injuries out of any sport or recreation activity. Hospitals and EDs reported a higher proportion of upper limb than lower limb injuries, whereas the opposite was true for sports medicine clinics. In hospitals, fractures and dislocations were most prevalent out of all injuries. In EDs and clinics, sprains/strains were most common in adults and superficial injuries were predominant in children. Most injuries resulted from contact with other players or falling. Conclusions: The upper limb was the most commonly injured body region for Australian football presentations to hospitals and EDs. Strategies to prevent upper limb injuries could reduce associated public health costs. However, to understand the full extent of the injury problem in football, treatment source surveillance systems should be supplemented with other datasets, including community club-based collections. © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Combining epidemiology and biomechanics in sports injury prevention research : A new approach for selecting suitable controls
- Finch, Caroline, Ullah, Shahid, McIntosh, Andrew
- Authors: Finch, Caroline , Ullah, Shahid , McIntosh, Andrew
- Date: 2011
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Sports Medicine Vol. 41, no. 1 (2011), p. 59-72
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Several important methodological issues need to be considered when designing sports injury case-control studies. Major design goals for case-control studies include the accounting for prior injury risk exposure, and optimal definitions of both cases and suitable controls are needed to ensure this. This article reviews methodological aspects of published sports injury case-control studies, particularly with regard to the selection of controls. It argues for a new approach towards selecting controls for case-control studies that draws on an interface between epidemiological and biomechanical concepts. A review was conducted to identify sport injury case-control studies published in the peer-review literature during 1985-2008. Overall, 32 articles were identified, of which the majority related to upper or lower extremity injuries. Matching considerations were used for control selection in 16 studies. Specific mention of application of biomechanical principles in the selection of appropriate controls was absent from all studies, including those purporting to evaluate the benefits of personal protective equipment to protect against impact injury. This is a problem because it could lead to biased conclusions, as cases and controls are not fully comparable in terms of similar biomechanical impact profiles relating to the injury incident, such as site of the impact on the body. The strength of the conclusions drawn from case-control studies, and the extent to which results can be generalized, is directly influenced by the definition and recruitment of cases and appropriate controls. Future studies should consider the interface between epidemiological and biomechanical concepts when choosing appropriate controls to ensure that proper adjustment of prior exposure to injury risk is made. To provide necessary guidance for the optimal selection of controls in case-control studies of interventions to prevent sports-related impact injury, this review outlines a new case-control selection strategy that reflects the importance of biomechanical considerations, which ensures that controls are selected based on the presence of the same global injury mechanism as the cases. To summarize, the general biomechanical principles that should apply to the selection of controls in future case-control studies are as follows: (i) each control must have been exposed to the same global injury mechanism as the case, (e.g. head impact, fall onto outstretched arm); and (ii) intrinsic (individual) factors (e.g. age, sex, skill level) that might modify the person's response to the relevant biomechanical loads are adjusted when either selecting the controls or are in the analysis phase. The same considerations for control selection apply to other study designs such as matched cohort studies or case-crossover studies. © 2011 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved.
- Authors: Finch, Caroline , Ullah, Shahid , McIntosh, Andrew
- Date: 2011
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Sports Medicine Vol. 41, no. 1 (2011), p. 59-72
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Several important methodological issues need to be considered when designing sports injury case-control studies. Major design goals for case-control studies include the accounting for prior injury risk exposure, and optimal definitions of both cases and suitable controls are needed to ensure this. This article reviews methodological aspects of published sports injury case-control studies, particularly with regard to the selection of controls. It argues for a new approach towards selecting controls for case-control studies that draws on an interface between epidemiological and biomechanical concepts. A review was conducted to identify sport injury case-control studies published in the peer-review literature during 1985-2008. Overall, 32 articles were identified, of which the majority related to upper or lower extremity injuries. Matching considerations were used for control selection in 16 studies. Specific mention of application of biomechanical principles in the selection of appropriate controls was absent from all studies, including those purporting to evaluate the benefits of personal protective equipment to protect against impact injury. This is a problem because it could lead to biased conclusions, as cases and controls are not fully comparable in terms of similar biomechanical impact profiles relating to the injury incident, such as site of the impact on the body. The strength of the conclusions drawn from case-control studies, and the extent to which results can be generalized, is directly influenced by the definition and recruitment of cases and appropriate controls. Future studies should consider the interface between epidemiological and biomechanical concepts when choosing appropriate controls to ensure that proper adjustment of prior exposure to injury risk is made. To provide necessary guidance for the optimal selection of controls in case-control studies of interventions to prevent sports-related impact injury, this review outlines a new case-control selection strategy that reflects the importance of biomechanical considerations, which ensures that controls are selected based on the presence of the same global injury mechanism as the cases. To summarize, the general biomechanical principles that should apply to the selection of controls in future case-control studies are as follows: (i) each control must have been exposed to the same global injury mechanism as the case, (e.g. head impact, fall onto outstretched arm); and (ii) intrinsic (individual) factors (e.g. age, sex, skill level) that might modify the person's response to the relevant biomechanical loads are adjusted when either selecting the controls or are in the analysis phase. The same considerations for control selection apply to other study designs such as matched cohort studies or case-crossover studies. © 2011 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved.
Priorities for investment in injury prevention in community Australian football
- Finch, Caroline, Gabbe, Belinda, White, Peta, Lloyd, David, Twomey, Dara, Donaldson, Alex, Elliott, Bruce, Cook, Jill
- Authors: Finch, Caroline , Gabbe, Belinda , White, Peta , Lloyd, David , Twomey, Dara , Donaldson, Alex , Elliott, Bruce , Cook, Jill
- Date: 2013
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Clinical journal of sport medicine Vol. 23, no. 6 (November 2013 2013), p. 430-438
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565907
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objective:High-quality sport-specific information about the nature, type, cause, and frequency of injuries is needed to set injury prevention priorities. This article describes the type, nature, and mechanism of injuries in community Australian Football (community AF) players, as collected through field-based monitoring of injury in teams of players.Data Sources:Compilation of published prospectively collected injury data from 3 studies in junior community AF (1202 injuries in 1950+ players) and 3 studies in adult community AF (1765 injuries in 2265 players). This was supplemented with previously unpublished data from the most recent adult community AF injury cohort study conducted in 2007 to 2008. Injuries were ranked according to most common body regions, nature of injury, and mechanism.Main Results:In all players, lower limb injuries were the most frequent injury in community AF and were generally muscle strains, joint sprains, and superficial injuries. These injuries most commonly resulted from incidental contact with other players, or from overexertion. Upper limb injuries were less common but included fractures, strains, and sprains that were generally caused by incidental contact between players and the result of players falling to the ground.Conclusions:Lower limb injuries are common in community AF and could have an adverse impact on sustained participation in the game. Based on what is known about their mechanisms, it is likely that a high proportion of lower limb injuries could be prevented and they should therefore be a priority for injury prevention in community AF.
- Authors: Finch, Caroline , Gabbe, Belinda , White, Peta , Lloyd, David , Twomey, Dara , Donaldson, Alex , Elliott, Bruce , Cook, Jill
- Date: 2013
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Clinical journal of sport medicine Vol. 23, no. 6 (November 2013 2013), p. 430-438
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565907
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objective:High-quality sport-specific information about the nature, type, cause, and frequency of injuries is needed to set injury prevention priorities. This article describes the type, nature, and mechanism of injuries in community Australian Football (community AF) players, as collected through field-based monitoring of injury in teams of players.Data Sources:Compilation of published prospectively collected injury data from 3 studies in junior community AF (1202 injuries in 1950+ players) and 3 studies in adult community AF (1765 injuries in 2265 players). This was supplemented with previously unpublished data from the most recent adult community AF injury cohort study conducted in 2007 to 2008. Injuries were ranked according to most common body regions, nature of injury, and mechanism.Main Results:In all players, lower limb injuries were the most frequent injury in community AF and were generally muscle strains, joint sprains, and superficial injuries. These injuries most commonly resulted from incidental contact with other players, or from overexertion. Upper limb injuries were less common but included fractures, strains, and sprains that were generally caused by incidental contact between players and the result of players falling to the ground.Conclusions:Lower limb injuries are common in community AF and could have an adverse impact on sustained participation in the game. Based on what is known about their mechanisms, it is likely that a high proportion of lower limb injuries could be prevented and they should therefore be a priority for injury prevention in community AF.
Intention to use sport concussion guidelines among community-level coaches and sports trainers
- Newton, Joshua, White, Peta, Ewing, Michael, Makdissi, Michael, Davis, Gavin, Donaldson, Alex, Sullivan, John, Seward, Hugh, Finch, Caroline
- Authors: Newton, Joshua , White, Peta , Ewing, Michael , Makdissi, Michael , Davis, Gavin , Donaldson, Alex , Sullivan, John , Seward, Hugh , Finch, Caroline
- Date: 2013
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport Vol.17, no.5 (2013), p.469-473
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objectives: Sporting bodies have developed guidelines for managing community-level players with suspected concussion in response to international consensus statements on concussion in sport. The purpose of this study was to examine the factors that influence the intended use of concussion guidelines among community-level coaches and sports trainers from two popular football codes in Australia: Australian football and rugby league. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Methods: The survey, based on an extended theory of planned behaviour model, was completed by 183 Australian football coaches, 121 Australian football sports trainers, 171 rugby league coaches, and 142 rugby league sports trainers. Results: Personal norms and self-efficacy were significant predictors of intention to use concussion guidelines, although the relationship between self-efficacy and intention was stronger among Australian football coaches than rugby league coaches. Analysis of the salient beliefs that underpin self-efficacy found that coaches, irrespective of football code, felt less familiar (2 = 25.70, p < 0.001) and less experienced (2 = 31.56, p < 0.001) than sports trainers in using the concussion guidelines. At the same time, Australian football personnel, irrespective oftheir team role, feltthatthey had insufficienttime (2 = 8.04, p < 0.01) and resources (2 = 12.31, p < 0.001) to implement the concussion guidelines relative to rugby league personnel. Conclusions: Programmes aimed at increasing the intended use of sport concussion guidelines should focus on enhancing self-efficacy and leveraging personal norms. Increasing coaches’ familiarity and experience in using the concussion guidelines would also be warranted, as would finding ways to overcome the perceived time and resource constraints identified among Australian football personnel.
- Authors: Newton, Joshua , White, Peta , Ewing, Michael , Makdissi, Michael , Davis, Gavin , Donaldson, Alex , Sullivan, John , Seward, Hugh , Finch, Caroline
- Date: 2013
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport Vol.17, no.5 (2013), p.469-473
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objectives: Sporting bodies have developed guidelines for managing community-level players with suspected concussion in response to international consensus statements on concussion in sport. The purpose of this study was to examine the factors that influence the intended use of concussion guidelines among community-level coaches and sports trainers from two popular football codes in Australia: Australian football and rugby league. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Methods: The survey, based on an extended theory of planned behaviour model, was completed by 183 Australian football coaches, 121 Australian football sports trainers, 171 rugby league coaches, and 142 rugby league sports trainers. Results: Personal norms and self-efficacy were significant predictors of intention to use concussion guidelines, although the relationship between self-efficacy and intention was stronger among Australian football coaches than rugby league coaches. Analysis of the salient beliefs that underpin self-efficacy found that coaches, irrespective of football code, felt less familiar (2 = 25.70, p < 0.001) and less experienced (2 = 31.56, p < 0.001) than sports trainers in using the concussion guidelines. At the same time, Australian football personnel, irrespective oftheir team role, feltthatthey had insufficienttime (2 = 8.04, p < 0.01) and resources (2 = 12.31, p < 0.001) to implement the concussion guidelines relative to rugby league personnel. Conclusions: Programmes aimed at increasing the intended use of sport concussion guidelines should focus on enhancing self-efficacy and leveraging personal norms. Increasing coaches’ familiarity and experience in using the concussion guidelines would also be warranted, as would finding ways to overcome the perceived time and resource constraints identified among Australian football personnel.
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »