Influence of Surveillance Methods in the Detection of Sports Injuries and Illnesses.

Background: Epidemiological data on sports injuries and illnesses depend on the surveillance methodology and the definition of the health problems. The effect of different surveillance methods on the data collection has been investigated for overuse injuries, but not for other health problems such as traumatic injuries and illnesses. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the new surveillance method developed by the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center (OSTRC), which is based on any complaint definition (new method), to identify health problems compared with the traditional surveillance method, which is based on time loss definition. Study design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: A total of 62 Japanese athletes were prospectively followed-up for 18 weeks to assess differences in health problems identified by both new and traditional methods. Every week, the athletes completed the Japanese version of the OSTRC questionnaire (OSTRC-H2.​JP), whereas the teams' athletic trainers registered health problems with a time loss definition. The numbers of health problems identified via each surveillance method were calculated and compared with each other to assess any differences between their results. Results: The average weekly response rate to the OSTRC-H2.​JP was 82.1% (95% CI, 79.8-84.3). This new method recorded 3.1 times more health problems (3.1 times more injuries and 2.8 times more illnesses) than the traditional method. The difference between both surveillance methods' counts was greater for overuse injuries (5.3 times) than for traumatic injuries (2.5 times). Conclusions: This study found that the new method captured more than three times as many health problems as the traditional method. In particular, the difference between both methods' counts was greater for overuse injuries than for traumatic injuries. Level of evidence: 2b.

Japanese translation and validation of web-based questionnaires on overuse injuries and health problems.

This study aimed to translate and culturally adapt the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center Overuse Injury Questionnaire (OSTRC-O) and the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center Questionnaire on Health Problems (OSTRC-H) into the Japanese context. The validity and reliability of these translated questionnaires examining overuse injuries and health problems among Japanese university athletes were also examined. The translation was performed following an internationally recognized methodology. A total of 145 athletes were tracked over 10 consecutive weeks and four questions were added in the 10th week to examine the questionnaires' content validity. Test-retest analysis for reliability was performed 24-72 hours after the 10th week of registration. Internal consistency was determined by calculating Cronbach's a during the cohort study. No major disagreements were found in the translation process. The translated questionnaires had high acceptance and compliance, with an average response rate of over 80% throughout the 10-week cohort study. Most participants reported that the questionnaires were not difficult to complete, there were no items they wanted to change or add, and that the web-based technique worked effectively. Good test-retest reliability and high internal consistency was observed in the translated questionnaires. The translated questionnaires were found to be valid, reliable, and acceptable for medically monitoring Japanese athletes.