BackgroundMusculoskeletal injuries occur frequently in runners and despite many studies about running injuries conducted over the past decades it is not clear in the literature what are the main running-related musculoskeletal injuries (RRMIs).ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to systematically review studies on the incidence and prevalence of the main specific RRMIs.MethodsAn electronic database search was conducted using EMBASE (1947 to October 2011), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2011), SPORTDiscus™ (1975 to October 2011), the Latin American and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information (LILACS) [1982 to October 2011] and the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) [1998 to October 2011] with no limits of date or language of publication. Articles that described the incidence or prevalence rates of RRMIs were considered eligible. Studies that reported only the type of injury, anatomical region or incomplete data that precluded interpretation of the incidence or prevalence rates of RRMIs were excluded. We extracted data regarding bibliometric characteristics, study design, description of the population of runners, RRMI definition, how the data of RRMIs were collected and the name of each RRMI with their rates of incidence or prevalence. Separate analysis for ultra-marathoners was performed. Among 2924 potentially eligible titles, eight studies (pooled n = 3500 runners) were considered eligible for the review. In general, the articles had moderate risk of bias and only one fulfilled less than half of the quality criteria established.ResultsA total of 28 RRMIs were found and the main general RRMIs were medial tibial stress syndrome (incidence ranging from 13.6% to 20.0%; prevalence of 9.5%), Achilles tendinopathy (incidence ranging from 9.1% to 10.9%; prevalence ranging from 6.2% to 9.5%) and plantar fasciitis (incidence ranging from 4.5% to 10.0%; prevalence ranging from 5.2% to 17.5%). The main ultra-marathon RRMIs were Achilles tendinopathy (prevalence ranging from 2.0% to 18.5%) and patellofemoral syndrome (prevalence ranging from 7.4% to 15.6%).ConclusionThis systematic review provides evidence that medial tibia stress syndrome, Achilles tendinopathy and plantar fasciitis were the main general RRMIs, while Achilles tendinopathy and patellofemoral syndrome were the most common RRMIs for runners who participated in ultra-marathon races.Electronic Supplementary MaterialSupplementary material is available for this article at 10.1007/BF03262301 and is accessible for authorized users.

Background: Musculoskeletal injuries occur frequently in runners and despite many studies about running injuries conducted over the past decades it is not clear in the literature what are the main running-related musculoskeletal injuries (RRMIs). Objective: The aim of this study is to systematically review studies on the incidence and prevalence of the main specific RRMIs. Methods: An electronic database search was conducted using EMBASE (1947 to October 2011), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2011), SPORTDiscusÔ (1975 to October 2011, the Latin American and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information (LILACS) [1982[ to October 2011 and the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) [1998[ to October 2011 with no limits of date or language of publication. Articles that described the incidence or prevalence rates of RRMIs were considered eligible. Studies that reported only the type of injury, anatomical region or incomplete data that precluded interpretation of the incidence or prevalence rates of RRMIs were excluded. We extracted data regarding bibliometric characteristics, study design, description of the population of runners, RRMI definition, how the data of RRMIs were collected and the name of each RRMI with their rates of incidence or prevalence. Separate analysis for ultra-marathoners was performed. Among 2924 potentially eligible titles, eight studies (pooled n = 3500 runners) were considered eligible for the review. In general, the articles had moderate risk of bias and only one fulfilled less than half of the quality criteria established. Results: A total of 28 RRMIs were found and the main general RRMIs were medial tibial stress syndrome (incidence ranging from 13.6% to 20.0%; prevalence of 9.5%), Achilles tendinopathy (incidence ranging from 9.1% to 10.9%; prevalence ranging from 6.2% to 9.5%) and plantar fasciitis (incidence ranging from 4.5% to 10.0%; prevalence ranging from 5.2% to 17.5%). The main ultra-marathon RRMIs were Achilles tendinopathy (prevalence ranging from 2.0% to 18.5%) and patellofemoral syndrome (prevalence ranging from 7.4% to 15.6%). Conclusion:This systematic review provides evidence that medial tibia stress syndrome, Achilles tendinopathy and plantar fasciitis were the main general RRMIs, while Achilles tendinopathy and patellofemoral syndrome were the most common RRMIs for runners who participated in ultra-marathon races.

Governments have restricted public life during the COVID-19 pandemic, inter alia closing sports facilities and gyms. As regular exercise is essential for health, this study examined the effect of pandemic-related confinements on physical activity (PA) levels. A multinational survey was performed in 14 countries. Times spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) as well as in vigorous physical activity only (VPA) were assessed using the Nordic Physical Activity Questionnaire (short form). Data were obtained for leisure and occupational PA pre- and during restrictions. Compliance with PA guidelines was calculated based on the recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO). In total, n = 13,503 respondents (39 ± 15 years, 59% females) were surveyed. Compared to pre-restrictions, overall self-reported PA declined by 41% (MVPA) and 42.2% (VPA). Reductions were higher for occupational vs. leisure time, young and old vs. middle-aged persons, previously more active vs. less active individuals, but similar between men and women. Compared to pre-pandemic, compliance with WHO guidelines decreased from 80.9% (95% CI: 80.3–81.7) to 62.5% (95% CI: 61.6–63.3). Results suggest PA levels have substantially decreased globally during the COVID-19 pandemic. Key stakeholders should consider strategies to mitigate loss in PA in order to preserve health during the pandemic.

The main risk factor identified in this review was previous injury in the last 12 months, although many risk factors had been investigated in the literature. Relatively few prospective studies were identified in this review, reducing the overall ability to detect risk factors. This highlights the need for more, well designed prospective studies in order to fully appreciate the risk factors associated with running.

Introduction: Reporting confidence intervals in scientific articles is important and relevant for evidence-based practice. Clinicians should understand confidence intervals in order to determine if they can realistically expect results similar to those presented in research studies when they implement the scientific evidence in clinical practice. The aims of this masterclass are: (1) to discuss confidence intervals around effect estimates; (2) to understand confidence intervals estimation (frequentist and Bayesian approaches); and (3) to interpret such uncertainty measures. Content: Confidence intervals are measures of uncertainty around effect estimates. Interpretation of the frequentist 95% confidence interval: we can be 95% confident that the true (unknown) estimate would lie within the lower and upper limits of the interval, based on hypothesized repeats of the experiment. Many researchers and health professionals oversimplify the interpretation of the frequentist 95% confidence interval by dichotomizing it in statistically significant or non-statistically significant, hampering a proper discussion on the values, the width (precision) and the practical implications of such interval. Interpretation of the Bayesian 95% confidence interval (which is known as credible interval): there is a 95% probability that the true (unknown) estimate would lie within the interval, given the evidence provided by the observed data.

This review provides the most updated evidence on the effectiveness of the Kinesio Taping for musculoskeletal conditions. The current evidence does not support the use of this intervention in these clinical populations. PROSPERO registration: CRD42012003436.

The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and risk factors for handball injuries in Brazilian elite handball players. Overall, 339 athletes from 21 handball teams who participated in the two main Brazilian championships were followed up during a season. In total, 312 injuries were reported by 201 athletes. The injury incidence rate during training was 3.7/1000 h, and during matches was 20.3/1000 matches. Ankle (19.4%, n = 46) and knee (13.5%, n = 32) were the body regions most affected by traumatic injuries. Shoulders (44.0%, n = 33) and knee (26.7%, n = 20) were the body regions most affected by overuse injuries. Muscle injuries (27.1%, n = 68) was the traumatic injury type most reported. Tendinopathy (91.8%, n = 56) was the overuse injury type most observed. Previous injury (OR: 2.42, CI 95%: 1.51-3.89) and an additional match per week (OR: 1.31, CI 95%: 1.05-1.62) were associated with a higher risk of overuse injury. Female athletes (OR: 1.56, CI 95%: 1.08-2.25) and an additional hour of training per week (OR: 1.09, CI 95%: 1.02-1.15) were associated with a higher risk of traumatic injury. This study showed that athletes with previous injury have shown a high risk of developing an overuse injury.

BackgroundIn order to implement running to promote physical activity, it is essential to quantify the extent to which running improves health.ObjectiveThe aim was to summarise the literature on the effects of endurance running on biomedical indices of health in physically inactive adults.Data SourcesElectronic searches were conducted in October 2014 on PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PEDro, the Cochrane Library and LILACS, with no limits of date and language of publication.Study SelectionRandomised controlled trials (with a minimum of 8 weeks of running training) that included physically inactive but healthy adults (18–65 years) were selected. The studies needed to compare intervention (i.e. endurance running) and control (i.e. no intervention) groups.Study Appraisal and Synthesis MethodsTwo authors evaluated study eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias; a third author resolved any uncertainties. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to summarise the estimates for length of training and sex. A dose-response analysis was performed with random-effects meta-regression in order to investigate the relationship between running characteristics and effect sizes.ResultsAfter screening 22,380 records, 49 articles were included, of which 35 were used to combine data on ten biomedical indices of health. On average the running programs were composed of 3.7 ± 0.9 sessions/week, 2.3 ± 1.0 h/week, 14.4 ± 5.4 km/week, at 60–90 % of the maximum heart rate, and lasted 21.5 ± 16.8 weeks. After 1 year of training, running was effective in reducing body mass by 3.3 kg [95 % confidence interval (CI) 4.1–2.5], body fat by 2.7 % (95 % CI 5.1–0.2), resting heart rate by 6.7 min−1 (95 % CI 10.3–3.0) and triglycerides by 16.9 mg dl−1 (95 % CI 28.1–5.6). Also, running significantly increased maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) by 7.1 ml min−1 kg−1 (95 % CI 5.0–9.1) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol by 3.3 mg dl−1 (95 % CI 1.2–5.4). No significant effect was found for lean body mass, body mass index, total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol after 1 year of training. In the dose-response analysis, larger effect sizes were found for longer length of training.LimitationsIt was only possible to combine the data of ten out the 161 outcome measures identified. Lack of information on training characteristics precluded a multivariate model in the dose-response analysis.ConclusionsEndurance running was effective in providing substantial beneficial effects on body mass, body fat, resting heart rate, VO2max, triglycerides and HDL cholesterol in physically inactive adults. The longer the length of training, the larger the achieved health benefits. Clinicians and health authorities can use this information to advise individuals to run, and to support policies towards investing in running programs.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40279-015-0359-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.