You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 58, Issue 15
  • Injury incidence according to athlete impairment type during the 2012 and 2016 Summer Paralympic Games: a combined analysis of 101 108 athlete days

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Original research
Injury incidence according to athlete impairment type during the 2012 and 2016 Summer Paralympic Games: a combined analysis of 101 108 athlete days
  1. Faatima Adam1,
  2. Wayne Derman1,2,
  3. Martin Schwellnus2,3,
  4. Pieter-Henk Boer4,
  5. Esme Jordaan5,6,
  6. Phoebe Runciman1
  1. 1 Institute of Sport and Exercise Medicine, Department of Exercise, Sport and Lifestyle Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa
  2. 2 International Olympic Committee Research Centre, Pretoria, South Africa
  3. 3 Sport, Exercise Medicine and Lifestyle Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa
  4. 4 Department of Human Movement Science, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa
  5. 5 Biostatistics Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
  6. 6 Statistics and Population Studies Department, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa
  1. Correspondence to Dr Phoebe Runciman; para{at}sun.ac.za

Abstract

Objectives The relationship between sport-related injuries and Para athlete impairment type has not yet been comprehensively studied. This study aimed to describe injury incidence according to athlete impairment type during the London 2012 and Rio 2016 Summer Paralympic Games, by sex, age, Games period, chronicity and anatomical area.

Methods A combined analysis of 7222 athletes was conducted comprising 101 108 athlete days, using pooled data. Internet sources were used to identify impairments of registered athletes. Impairment types: brain disorders (BD), limb deficiency, neuromuscular disorders (NMD), spinal cord-related disorders, visual impairment (VI) and ‘all others’ (OTH: impaired passive range of movement, intellectual impairment, leg length difference, short stature and unknown impairments). Results by impairment type are reported as univariate unadjusted incidences (injuries/1000 athlete days; 95% CIs). Statistical significance between impairment types was determined when 95% CIs did not overlap.

Results The overall crude unadjusted incidence of injury was 11.1 (95% CI 10.4 to 11.9), significantly higher in VI (13.7 (95% CI 11.0 to 15.7)) and NMD (13.3 (95% CI 11.1 to 16.1)) compared with BD (9.1 (95% CI 7.7 to 10.8)). Acute (sudden onset) (8.6 (95% CI 7.3 to 10.1)) and lower limb (6.6 (95% CI 5.4 to 8.1)) injuries were higher among athletes with VI, while athletes with NMD had a higher incidence of repetitive (gradual onset) (5.9 (95% CI 4.3 to 8.0)) and upper limb (6.9 (95% CI 5.2 to 9.0)) injuries compared with other impairments.

Conclusions Incidence and type of injuries differed between athlete impairment types. Athletes with VI or NMD sustained the highest incidence of injury, and athletes with BD had the lowest. Findings of this study can inform the management of competition-related injuries in Para athletes.

  • Epidemiology
  • Para-Athletes
  • Disabled Persons
  • Sporting injuries
  • Sports medicine

Data availability statement

No data are available.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2023-107144

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.

    Data availability statement

    No data are available.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • X @wderman

    • Contributors All authors have contributed to the development, application and write up of the current study. Each author has completed a conflicts of interest form. WD stands as guarantor.

    • Funding Funding for this study was provided by the IOC Research Centre South Africa.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

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

    • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.