ObjectiveTo summarise the information available in the literature on the prevalence of injuries in water polo and injury risk factors.MethodsProtocol was registered on Open Science Framework. MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase and SPORTDiscus databases were searched for keywords relating to water polo and injuries on 3 February 2021. References were searched for additional studies. Only original research papers in English or French were included, and studies without an injured group were excluded. A data extraction file was made based on the Cochrane Collaboration recommendations. Study quality was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa scales for cohorts and a modified version for cross-sectional studies.ResultsThe initial search yielded 581 articles, with 5 more added from reference lists, but only 41 remained after removing duplicates and applying inclusion/exclusion criteria. Thirty-one articles identified the head, fingers and shoulders as the most common sites of injury. Ten articles on mechanism of injury focused mainly on the shoulder, with degenerative changes, posture, scapular alignment, strength, flexibility and overhead shooting kinematics as the main injury risk factors. Publication types included cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, and one case series.ConclusionsMost traumatic injuries affect the hands and the head from unexpected contact with the ball or opponents. Conversely, training injuries seem to affect mainly the shoulder area. Low level evidence suggests a correlation between shoulder injuries and lack of strength or flexibility as well as large volumes of overhead throwing. Further prospective research is needed to investigate risk factors for other body areas.

Dong, L, Paradelo, D, Delorme, A, Oliveira, J, Parillo, B, Croteau, F, Romeas, T, Dubé, E, Bieuzen, F, Billaut, F, and Berryman, N. Sport-specific agility and change of direction in water polo: The reliability and validity of two newly developed tests. J Strength Cond Res 35(12S): S111–S118, 2021—There is a gap in water-based agility testing that considers both the change-of-direction (COD) and perceptive-reactive components of agility. This study sought to develop easily implementable, sport-specific in-water agility tests for water polo and to verify the reliability and validity of these new tests: the in-water Stop and Go (SG) and Jump and Go (JG). Female water polo athletes at the Senior (n = 12, age = 22.1 ± 2.1 years), Junior (n = 19, age = 18.5 ± 1.0 years), and Youth (n = 11, age = 16.5 ± 0.8 years) national levels performed 3 trials of each of the SG, JG, and the existing Functional Test for Agility Performance (FTAP). Senior athletes performed an additional experimental session to assess reliability parameters. Relative reliability for agility and COD versions of the SG and JG was high or very high (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.76–0.95). For construct validity analyses, significant between-group differences for each of the new tests (p < 0.05) were found. In contrast, the FTAP was moderately reliable (ICC = 0.57) and was unsuccessful in discriminating between playing levels. Considering the favorable metrological properties of the SG and JG, their fidelity to in-game demands, and their accessible setups, these new tests represent viable options to implement at grassroots and elite levels for the assessment and training of water polo–specific agility.

No abstract

No abstract

Context: Previous authors suggest that lack of strength is an important risk factor for injuries in water polo. Hand-held dynamometers have potential as a clinical tool to measure strength, but they have not been validated in water polo players. Objective: The purpose of this study was to estimate intertrial variability and concurrent validity of hand-held dynamometer shoulder strength measurements in elite water polo players. Methods: A total of 19 male and 20 female elite water polo players performed isometric external (ER) and internal (IR) rotation strength tests against a hand-held dynamometer bilaterally in supine position with the shoulder in a 90–90 position. In addition, concentric IR and ER was captured at 90 deg/s with an isokinetic dynamometer, and torque values were determined near the 90–90 position. Main Outcome Measures: Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for ER torque, IR torque, and ER/IR ratios between the devices. Two-way mixed-model intraclass correlations were used to assess intertrial variability. Results: Correlations between the devices were strong to very strong (ρ = .65–.82, P < .01) for absolute IR and ER but low for ER/IR ratios (ρ = .29, P = .07). There was less agreement at higher torque values. Intertrial variability was low with intraclass correlation values .88 to .93, P < .05. Conclusions: These results show that hand-held dynamometers are adequate clinical alternatives to measure absolute shoulder strength in water polo players. Stronger players may require stronger evaluators to resist the player’s push and obtain reliable results.