You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Discussion
‘Training load error’ is not a more accurate term than ‘overuse’ injury
  1. Judd Kalkhoven,
  2. Aaron James Coutts,
  3. Franco M Impellizzeri
  1. Human performance research Centre, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Professor Franco M Impellizzeri, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2007, Australia; franco.impellizzeri{at}uts.edu.au

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2019-101710

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    It has been proposed to bin the term ‘overuse’ injury and replace it with ‘training load error’ as a more accurate term.1 There are several concerns with this proposal. To warrant a name change, the new name should provide additional benefit beyond that which overuse currently provides, be based on reasonable and sound arguments and assumptions, and be coherent with the best practice and evidence available.

    Training load is just one factor among an array of factors that may contribute to overuse injury occurrence, as has been highlighted in more complex models.2 Defining overuse injuries as training load errors is a negation of their multifactorial nature. If training load error was to be adopted, this would not be a question of defining an event by its mechanisms, but defining the event by arbitrary picking one of the potential antecedent causal factors among different levels of the injury causal pathway. Such misuse of terminology may provide temptation to rename reinjury occurrence when returning to play or training as ‘physiotherapy error’ injuries, various intraoperative …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Twitter @KalkhovenJudd, @aaronjcoutts, @francoimpell

    • Contributors JK, AJC and FMI have all contributed to the contents and revision of the communication.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.