Evaluation of injury surveillance data collected during major multisport games: Informing a standardized prospective injury surveillance system for the Canada Games
AbstractThis thesis includes two projects focused on the injury surveillance system used by the Canada Games (CG). The first, examined the interrater reliability of coding of injury information collected using the injury surveillance system employed at the CG. The injury report form data from the 2017 and 2019 CG was independently coded by two researchers with sports medicine backgrounds and based on the categorization and definitions used by the 2020 International Olympic Committee (IOC) consensus statement on methods for recording and reporting injury and illness data and the Orchard Sports Injury and Illness Classification System (OSIICS). The level of agreement based on percent agreement and Cohen’s kappa analysis (most interrater reliability was between moderate and substantial) was then determined between the two coded sets of data. The average percent agreement between the two researchers was 78.97% and the available information resulted in 8% of unknown or undiagnosed interpretations. The second project investigated injuries in both male and female able-bodied athletes competing in the same sports at the CG. Available registration and medical reports from the 2009-2019 summer and winter games were coded using the IOC consensus statement and OSIICS. The Summer Games had an incidence rate of 13.57 injuries (95%CI 12.70-14.48) and 13.22 injuries (95%CI 12.39-14.10) per 1000 athlete-days for female and male athletes, respectively, with an incidence rate ratio of 1.02 (95% CI 0.93-1.12). The winter Games had an incidence rate of 13.68 injuries (95%CI 12.65-14.78) and 13.91 injuries (95%CI 12.89-14.99) per 1000 athlete-days for female and male athletes, respectively, with an incidence rate ratio of 0.98 (95% CI 0.88-1.10). The CG had a higher rate of injuries, specifically gradual onset injuries compared to the Olympic Games (OG) and Youth Olympic Games (YOG). The lack of standardization in the current medical records does not allow for consistent coding of minimal recommended injury surveillance data. This may explain the significant difference in injury rates reported at the CG compared to the OG and YOG. A new injury surveillance system that is up to international standards may assist in more accurate reporting and comparison across similar studies.
The following license files are associated with this item:
- Creative Commons