MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2041619403 · doi:10.1097/00042752-200101000-00015

Women's Recreational Ice Hockey Injuries

2001· article· en· W2041619403 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Lawrence E. Hart, Louise Walker

Notice bibliographique

RevueClinical Journal of Sport Medicine · 2001
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSports injuries and prevention
Établissements canadiensU SPORTS
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIce hockeyRecreationMedicineLeagueInjury preventionPoison controlPhysical therapyEpidemiologyDemographyMedical emergencyPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Dryden DM, Francescutti LH, Rowe BH, Spence JC, Voaklander DC. Epidemiology of women's recreational ice hockey injuries. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000;32:1378–1383. ObjectiveWomen's Recreational Ice Hockey Injuries To examine the incidence and nature of injuries in female recreational ice hockey players. DesignWomen's Recreational Ice Hockey Injuries Cohort study for the duration of the 1997 to 1998 ice hockey season. SettingWomen's Recreational Ice Hockey Injuries Women's ice hockey leagues, Edmonton, Canada. ParticipantsWomen's Recreational Ice Hockey Injuries Participants were recruited from all the teams in the 2 women's ice hockey leagues, which represented ¬90% of the area's women's recreational ice hockey players. The study included 314 players from 33 teams (74% of the players). Players were subdivided into women in adult teams (adult women's recreational teams [AWRT]), n = 236, mean age 27 years) and midget teams (≤18 years of age, n = 78, mean age 14.7 years). Assessment of risk factorsWomen's Recreational Ice Hockey Injuries Players were recruited in the dressing room immediately after the first game of the season. Information on anthropomorphic, demographic, and lifestyle characteristics and history of injuries was obtained. Telephone interviewers collected game participation and injury data monthly. Main outcome measuresWomen's Recreational Ice Hockey Injuries Injuries were defined as any acute injury sustained while playing women's ice hockey during any game or practice that resulted in the women missing the remainder of the game or practice, a subsequent game or practice, and/or required the women to consult a health professional. Diagnoses were self-reported or obtained from the health professional consulted. Injury rates were calculated as number of injuries divided by the sum of the players' reported game and practice attendances. Main resultsWomen's Recreational Ice Hockey Injuries 102 players reported 125 injuries during the season (7.5 injuries/ 1,000 player exposures [PE]). Among the AWRT there were 93 injuries (7.8 injuries/1,000 PE) compared with 32 injuries to midget players (6.7 injuries/1,000 PE). For all players the lower extremity was most frequently injured (AWRT, 28% of injuries and midget, 41%) followed by injuries to the upper extremity, the torso, and the head/neck/face (29% and 22%; 25% and 31%; and 18% and 6%, for AWRT and midget, respectively). Overall the most frequently injured sites were the lower back (14%), the knee (12%), and the shoulder (10%). The predominant injury diagnosis for AWRT players was sprain/strain (57%) and for midget players was contusion (50%). The dominant mechanism of injury was player contact from collisions or body checks (40%). These were similar for AWRT and midget players. 66% of injuries occurred during league games, 27% during play-off, tournament, and exhibition games, and 7% during practices. The greatest proportion of injuries (44%) occurred during the third period of games. Medical attention was not sought for 36% of injuries. 1 player was hospitalized for a meniscal tear. 18% of injuries resulted in an absence from hockey of (≥8 days. ConclusionWomen's Recreational Ice Hockey Injuries Both adult and young women playing recreational ice hockey are at risk for injury, more so during games than practices. Source of funding: Royal Alexandra Hospital Foundation, Alberta. For article reprint: Dr. Don Voaklander, Department of Rural Health, University of Melbourne, PO Box 6500, Shepparton, Victoria 3632, Australia. CommentaryWomen's Recreational Ice Hockey Injuries The study by Dryden et al. was designed to be able to compare injury rates in a recreational women's hockey league with a similar study of a men's recreational league. 1 Schick et al., 2 in a study of Canada West Universities Athletic Association (CWUAA) teams, found an injury rate similar to Dryden and also compared females with males. In their larger study (33 versus 12 teams), Dryden et al. concluded that the injury rate was lower in the women's league (7.5 injuries/1,000 PE overall) than in the men's league (12.2 injuries/1,000 PE). However, Schick did not find a significant difference although there were fewer injuries on the women's teams (7.77 injuries/1,000 PE) than the men's teams (9.19 injuries/1,000 PE). The results may differ because Schick investigated more highly competitive teams than did Dryden. The most common female injuries (>80%) in the recreational league were sprains, strains, and contusions, whereas concussion was the most common injury in the CWUAA. Injuries resulting from contact were the most common injuries in both cases. Body checking is not allowed at any level of women's hockey but there is contact with boards, ice, an opponent, sticks, etc. The high incidence of concussion in CWUAA women's hockey raises concern, but generalization to women's hockey in the United States may not be possible because equipment requirements differ in the two countries. Since studies in boxing have shown a reduction in concussions by the use of mouth guards, they have become mandatory for women hockey players in the U.S.A. Neck guards to reduce serious lacerations are mandatory in Canada. Both studies noted a higher incidence of low back injuries in women than in men, which deserves further study. As in studies on men, injuries seem to be more common in games versus practices, early season or league versus late season or play-offs, and late in the game versus early. Understanding the epidemiology of hockey injuries should spur future research in the direction of injury prevention.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,023
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,046

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,055
Tête enseignante GPT0,402
Écart entre enseignants0,347 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2001
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueClinical Journal of Sport MedicineMême sujetSports injuries and preventionTravaux en français237 207