Objective. To compile an injury profile of 46 fast bowlers aged 11 - 18 years, and to identify the associated risk factors for injury during one academy cricket season.
Methods. The fast bowlers selected were tested and observed for one academy cricket season (March - November). Subjects were grouped into injury classifications (uninjured=S1; injured but able to play=S2; injured and unable to play=S3). Anthropometrical and postural data for the subjects were collected preseason
(T1). Physical fitness screenings were conducted and the relationship between fitness and occurrence of injuries was assessed. Additional factors such as bowling techniques and
bowling workload were assessed. A regression analysis was conducted to analyse the relationship between bowling workload and weeks incapacitated.
Results. Fifteen per cent of the subjects remained injury free for the duration of the season. The incidence of serious injury (S3) showed a statistical and moderate, practical significant increase (V=0.23, df≥2) throughout the data collection period (4% at T1 - 30% at T3 (post-season)). The most common injuries were to the knee (41%) and lower back (37%), occurring from mid-season (T2) to T3. The nature of the injuries was predominantly strains
(39%) and ‘other' (39%), with the highest reported incidence during the period T1 - T3. Sprains followed, with an overall incidence of 14%. Subjects were incapacitated approximately 1 out of every 7 weeks of play. The S1 and S2 bowlers performed consistently
better than the S3 bowlers in all the fitness variables tested. Bowling workload presented a statistically significant (p
BackgroundBovine Taenia saginata cysticercus infections (also called bovine cysticercosis or beef measles) is usually diagnosed in cattle only during post-mortem meat inspection. The aim of this study was to investigate the identification rates of these infections in and to identify predictors/determinants of variations in the identification rates in abattoirs in Gauteng province, South Africa.MethodsRetrospective data for over 1.4 million cattle carcasses inspected in 26 abattoirs between January 2010 and December 2013 were used for the study. The identification rates (proportion of bovine Taenia saginata cysticercus positive carcasses) were computed and generalized estimating equations used to identify predictors/determinants of identification rates.ResultsThe overall identification rate was 0.70% (95% CI: 0.45, 0.95). Significantly (p< 0.05) lower rates were reported during summer (0.55%) than other seasons. Some geographic areas reported significantly (p<0.05) higher rates than others. The identification rates in high throughput abattoirs was significantly (p<0.05) higher (RR: 9.4; 95% CI: 4.7–19.1) than in low throughput abattoirs. Similarly, the identification rates among animals from feedlots were significantly (p<0.05) higher (RR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.7–3.5) than those from non-feedlot sources. No significant (p>0.05) association was identified between identification rates and either the number of meat inspectors per abattoir or the provider of inspection services.ConclusionAlthough no significant association was found between identification rates and provider of inspection services, follow-up studies will need to be done to specifically investigate the potential conflict of interest arising from the fact that abattoir owners hire meat inspection services directly. Capture of abattoir surveillance data needs to include farm address and for each case to be reported separately. Finally, information on the type of identified cysts (alive or calcified) need to be collected to help better estimate risk to consumers. This study provides useful baseline data to guide future studies, surveillance and control efforts.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.