International cricket injury surveillance: a report of five teams competing in the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011
- 1Cardiff School of Sport, Cardiff Metropolitan University—UWIC, Cardiff, Wales, UK
- 2Profiler Corporation, Dunedin, New Zealand
- 3International Cricket Council, Sports City, Dubai, UAE
- 4Department of Sports Medicine, University of the West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica
- Correspondence to Dr Craig Ranson, Cardiff School of Sport, Cardiff Metropolitan University—UWIC, Cyncoed, Cardiff, Wales CF23 6XD, UK;
- Received 11 September 2012
- Revised 23 January 2013
- Accepted 26 January 2013
- Published Online First 16 February 2013
Background Injury surveillance is the cornerstone of effective injury management. However, to date no studies using recommended methods and involving multiple nations have been conducted within International Cricket.
Aim To conduct injury surveillance across multiple teams during the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011.
Methods An electronic system, based on the guidelines for injury surveillance in international cricket, was used to record all new injury episodes was used for data collection.
Results Twenty-three time-loss and 97 non-time-loss injuries were recorded. The injury incidence was 3.7/100 player-days (0.7 time-loss and 3.0 non-time-loss) with time-loss incidence being; for match injury 20.1/1000 player-days, bowling injury 3.3/100 bowling days and batting injuries 2.2/10 000 balls faced. Thigh muscle strain and medical illness were the diagnoses with the highest incidence. Fast bowlers, slow bowlers and batters all had a similar injury prevalence of approximately 5%. The bowling delivery stride was the activity that resulted in the greatest lost time.
Conclusions This is the first study to use recommended injury surveillance guidelines to reporting injury rates across multiple teams at a major cricket tournament. Non-time-loss injury incidence appears relatively high and further study of the effect on performance and progression to subsequent time-loss is required. Fast bowler injury prevalence rates are lower than reported elsewhere, however this may be due to the nature of the tournament and match format, which is likely to impose a lower relative workload. In future, data from all competing teams over all formats of the game (Twenty20, ODI and Tests) needs to be analysed to effectively inform injury prevention research and practice.