Recurrent ankle sprains can be reduced by following a neuromuscular training (NMT) program via a printed Booklet or a mobile application. Regarding the high incidence of ankle sprains, cost-effectiveness regarding implementation can have a large effect on total societal costs. In this economic analysis, we evaluated whether the method of implementing a proven effective NMT program using an App or a Booklet resulted in differences in injury incidence rates leading to costs and hence to differences in cost-effectiveness. In total, 220 athletes with a previous ankle sprain were recruited for this randomized controlled trial with a follow-up of 12 months. Half of the athletes used the freely available “Strengthen your ankle” App and the other half received a printed Booklet. After the 8-week program, athletes were questioned monthly on their recurrent injuries. Primary outcome measures were incidence density of ankle injury and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). During follow-up, 31 athletes suffered from a recurrent ankle sprain that led to costs resulting in a hazard ratio of 1.13 (95% CI: 0.56-2.27). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the App group in comparison with the Booklet group was €361.52. The CE plane shows that there was neither a difference in effects nor in costs between both intervention methods. This study showed that the method of implementing the NMT program using an App or a Booklet led to similar cost-effectiveness ratios and the same occurrence of recurrent injuries leading to costs. Both the App and the Booklet can be used to prevent recurrent ankle injuries, showing no differences in (cost-) effectiveness at 12-month follow-up.
Objective Helmet use in Dutch recreational skiers and snowboarders (DRSS) remains low. This study evaluated the effects of exposure to a nationwide intervention on relevant determinants of helmet use and helmet use in DRSS. Methods The intervention mapping protocol was used to develop an in-season intervention programme targeted at adult DRSS. A prospective single-cohort study was conducted to evaluate the impact of intervention exposure on determinants of helmet use (ie, knowledge about head injury risk and preventive measures, risk perception, attitudes to head injury risk and helmet use and intention to helmet use) and self-reported helmet use. A random sample of 363 DRSS from an existing panel participated in this study. Data were collected using online questionnaires before and immediately after the 2010/2011 intervention season. In a separate sample of 363 DRSS, intervention reach was assessed after the 2010/2011 season. Results Overall, no significant associations were found between intervention exposure and the determinants of helmet use. However, subgroup analyses revealed intervention effects on risk perception and knowledge in specific subpopulations. Intervention exposure had a significant, positive effect on helmet use in DRSS (β=0.23; 95% CI 0.017 to 0.44). Subgroup analyses revealed that this effect was found in: (1) skiers, (2) female DRSS, (3) young skiers and (4) intermediate skiers. Overall, intervention reach was 28.1%, with differences found between skiers and snowboarders. Conclusions Exposure to a nationwide intervention programme was associated with increased selfreported helmet use in DRSS. Differences were found in intervention effectiveness and reach between subpopulations. These differences must be taken into account when developing and evaluating future interventions.