Systematic review of the parachute ankle brace: injury risk reduction and cost effectiveness.

INTRODUCTION: Military parachuting has been shown to result in injuries. This investigation systematically reviewed studies examining the influence of the parachute ankle brace (PAB) on injuries during military parachuting and performed a cost-effectiveness analysis. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Parachute ankle brace studies were obtained from seven databases, personal contacts, and other sources. Investigations were reviewed if they contained original, quantitative information on PAB use and injuries during parachuting. Meta-analysis was performed using a general variance-based meta-analysis method that calculated summary risk ratios (SRR) and 95% CIs. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Five studies met the review criteria. Compared with PAB users, PAB non-users had a higher risk of ankle injuries (SRR=2.1, 95% CI=1.8-2.5); ankle sprains (SRR=2.1, 95% CI=1.4-3.1); ankle fractures (SRR=1.8, 95% CI=1.1-2.9); and all parachuting injuries combined (SRR=1.2, 95% CI=1.1-1.4). The PAB had little effect on lower body injuries exclusive of the ankle (SRR [no PAB/PAB]=0.9, 95% CI=0.7-1.2). Cost-effectiveness analysis estimated that, for every dollar expended on the PAB, a savings of about $7 to $9 could be achieved in medical and personnel costs. CONCLUSIONS: The PAB reduces ankle injuries by about half and is a cost effective device that should be worn during military airborne operations to reduce injury risk.

Injury reduction effectiveness of selecting running shoes based on plantar shape.

Popular running magazines and running shoe companies suggest that imprints of the bottom of the feet (plantar shape) can be used as an indication of the height of the medial longitudinal foot arch and that this can be used to select individually appropriate types of running shoes. This study examined whether or not this selection technique influenced injury risk during United States Army Basic Combat Training (BCT). After foot examinations, BCT recruits in an experimental group (E: n = 1,079 men and 451 women) selected motion control, stability, or cushioned shoes for plantar shapes judged to represent low, medium, or high foot arches, respectively. A control group (C: n = 1,068 men and 464 women) received a stability shoe regardless of plantar shape. Injuries during BCT were determined from outpatient medical records. Other previously known injury risk factors (e.g., age, fitness, and smoking) were obtained from a questionnaire and existing databases. Multivariate Cox regression controlling for other injury risk factors showed little difference in injury risk between the E and C groups among men (risk ratio (E/C) = 1.01; 95% confidence interval = 0.88-1.16; p = 0.87) or women (risk ratio (E/C) = 1.07; 95% confidence interval = 0.91-1.25; p = 0.44). In practical application, this prospective study demonstrated that selecting shoes based on plantar shape had little influence on injury risk in BCT. Thus, if the goal is injury prevention, this selection technique is not necessary in BCT.

Physical fitness and body composition after a 9-month deployment to Afghanistan.

PURPOSE: To examine change in physical fitness and body composition after a military deployment to Afghanistan. METHODS: One hundred and ten infantry soldiers were measured before and after a 9-month deployment to Afghanistan for Operation Enduring Freedom. Measurements included treadmill peak oxygen uptake (peak VO2), lifting strength, medicine ball put, vertical jump, and body composition estimated via dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (percent body fat, absolute body fat, fat-free mass, bone mineral content, and bone mineral density). RESULTS: There were significant decreases (P < 0.01) in peak VO2 (-4.5%), medicine ball put (-4.9%), body mass (-1.9%), and fat-free mass (-3.5%), whereas percent body fat increased from 17.7% to 19.6%. Lifting strength and vertical jump performance did not change predeployment to postdeployment. CONCLUSIONS: Nine months deployment to Afghanistan negatively affected aerobic capacity, upper body power, and body composition. The predeployment to postdeployment changes were not large and unlikely to present a major health or fitness concern. If deployments continue to be extended and time between deployments decreased, the effects may be magnified and further study warranted.

Mouthguards in sport activities : history, physical properties and injury prevention effectiveness.

Three systematic reviews were conducted on: (i) the history of mouthguard use in sports; (ii) mouthguard material and construction; and (iii) the effectiveness of mouthguards in preventing orofacial injuries and concussions. Retrieval databases and bibliographies were explored to find studies using specific key words for each topic. The first recorded use of mouthguards was by boxers, and in the 1920s professional boxing became the first sport to require mouthguards. Advocacy by the American Dental Association led to the mandating of mouthguards for US high school football in the 1962 season. Currently, the US National Collegiate Athletic Association requires mouthguards for four sports (ice hockey, lacrosse, field hockey and football). However, the American Dental Association recommends the use of mouthguards in 29 sports/exercise activities. Mouthguard properties measured in various studies included shock-absorbing capability, hardness, stiffness (indicative of protective capability), tensile strength, tear strength (indicative of durability) and water absorption. Materials used for mouthguards included: (i) polyvinylacetate-polyethylene or ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) copolymer; (ii) polyvinylchloride; (iii) latex rubber; (iv) acrylic resin; and (v) polyurethane. Latex rubber was a popular material used in early mouthguards but it has lower shock absorbency, lower hardness and less tear and tensile strength than EVA or polyurethane. Among the more modern materials, none seems to stand out as superior to another since the characteristics of all the modern materials can be manipulated to provide a range of favourable characteristics. Impact studies have shown that compared with no mouthguard, mouthguards composed of many types of materials reduce the number of fractured teeth and head acceleration. In mouthguard design, consideration must be given to the nature of the collision (hard or soft objects) and characteristics of the mouth (e.g. brittle incisors, more rugged occusal surfaces of molars, soft gingiva). Laminates with different shock absorbing and stress distributing (stiffness) capability may be one way to accommodate these factors.Studies comparing mouthguard users with nonusers have examined different sports, employed a variety of study designs and used widely-varying injury case definitions. Prior to the 1980s, most studies exhibited relatively low methodological quality. Despite these issues, meta-analyses indicated that the risk of an orofacial sports injury was 1.6-1.9 times higher when a mouthguard was not worn. However, the evidence that mouthguards protect against concussion was inconsistent, and no conclusion regarding the effectiveness of mouthguards in preventing concussion can be drawn at present. Mouthguards should continue to be used in sport activities where there is significant risk of orofacial injury.