Competing interests NE, RM, NH, DG and AB received remuneration from sporting organisations as per author affiliations. patient consent for publication Not required. provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

ObjectivesTo report COVID-19 illness pattern, symptom duration and time loss in UK elite athletes.MethodsObservational, clinical and database review of athletes with symptomatic COVID-19 illness managed within the UK Sports Institutes. Athletes were classified as confirmed (positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR or antibody tests) or probable (consistent clinical features) COVID-19. Clinical presentation was characterised by the predominant symptom focus (eg, upper or lower respiratory illness). Time loss was defined as days unavailable for full sport participation and comparison was made with a 2016–2019 respiratory illness dataset from the same surveillance system.ResultsBetween 24 February 2020 and 18 January 2021, 147 athletes (25 Paralympic (17%)) with mean (SD) age 24.7 (5.2) years, 37% female, were diagnosed with COVID-19 (76 probable, 71 confirmed). Fatigue was the most prevalent symptom (57%), followed by dry cough (50%) and headache (46%). The median (IQR) symptom duration was 10 (6–17) days but 14% reported symptoms >28 days. Median time loss was 18 (12–30) days, with 27% not fully available >28 days from initial date of infection. This was greater than our historical non-COVID respiratory illness comparator; 6 days, 0–7 days (p<0.001) and 4% unavailable at 28 days. A lower respiratory phenotype (ie, including dyspnoea±chest pain±cough±fever) was present in 18% and associated with a higher relative risk of prolonged symptoms risk ratio 3.0 (95% CI: 1.4 to 6.5) and time loss 2.1 (95% CI: 1.2 to 3.5).ConclusionsIn this cohort, COVID-19 largely resulted in a mild, self-limiting illness. The presence of lower respiratory tract features was associated with prolonged illness and a delayed return to sport.

BackgroundThe value of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) after a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or minor stroke is untested despite these conditions sharing similar pathology and risk factors to coronary heart disease. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a trial of an adapted home-based CR programme, ‘The Healthy Brain Rehabilitation Manual’, for patients following a TIA/minor stroke, participants’ views on the intervention and, to identify the behaviour change techniques (BCTs) used.MethodsClinicians were asked to identify patients attending the Ulster Hospital, Belfast within 4 weeks of a first TIA or minor stroke. Those who agreed to participate underwent assessments of physical fitness, cardiovascular risk, quality of life and mental health, before random allocation to: Group (1) standard/usual care; (2) rehabilitation manual or (3) manual plus pedometer. All participants received telephone support at 1 and 4 weeks, reassessment at 6 weeks and an invitation to a focus group exploring views regarding the study. Two trained review authors independently assessed the manual to identify the BCTs used.ResultsTwenty-eight patients were invited to participate, with 15 (10 men, 5 women; 9 TIA, 6 minor stroke; mean age 69 years) consenting and completing the study. Mean time to enrolment from the TIA/stroke was 20.5 days. Participants completed all assessment measures except VO2max testing, which all declined. The manual and telephone contact were viewed positively, as credible sources of advice. Pedometers were valued highly, particularly for goal-setting. Overall, 36 individual BCTs were used, the commonest being centred around setting goals and planning as well as social support.ConclusionRecruitment and retention rates suggest that a trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a novel home-based CR programme, implemented within 4 weeks of a first TIA/minor stroke is feasible. The commonest BCTs used within the manual revolve around goals, planning and social support, in keeping with UK national guidelines. The findings from this feasibility work have been used to further refine the next stage of the intervention’s development, a pilot study.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02712385. This study was registered prospectively on 18/03/2016.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12872-017-0717-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundCardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes offering secondary prevention for cardiovascular disease (CVD) advise healthy lifestyle behaviours, with the behaviour change techniques (BCTs) of goals and planning, feedback and monitoring, and social support recommended. More information is needed about BCT use in home-based CR to support these programmes in practice.AimTo identify and describe the use of BCTs in home-based CR programmes.Design and settingRandomised controlled trials of home-based CR between 2005 and 2015 were identified by searching MEDLINE®, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database.MethodReviewers independently screened titles and abstracts for eligibility. Relevant data, including BCTs, were extracted from included studies. A meta-analysis studied risk factor change in home-based and comparator programmes.ResultsFrom 2448 studies identified, 11 of good methodological quality (10 on post-myocardial infarction, one on heart failure, 1907 patients) were included. These reported the use of 20 different BCTs. Social support (unspecified) was used in all studies and goal setting (behaviour) in 10. Of the 11 studies, 10 reported effectiveness in reducing CVD risk factors, but one study showed no improvement compared to usual care. This study differed from effective programmes in that it didn’t include BCTs that had instructions on how to perform the behaviour and monitoring, or a credible source.ConclusionSocial support and goal setting were frequently used BCTs in home-based CR programmes, with the BCTs related to monitoring, instruction on how to perform the behaviour, and credible source being included in effective programmes. Further robust trials are needed to determine the relative value of different BCTs within CR programmes.

Background Intra-articular (IA) corticosteroid (CS) injections are the mainstay of treatment for symptomatic management in knee osteoarthritis (OA), particularly in the UK. IA platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections are a promising alternative, but no systematic reviews to date have compared them to the current standard of care, IA CS injections. We aim to investigate the effect of IA PRP injections versus IA corticosteroid injections for the symptomatic management of knee OA. Methods All published trials comparing IA PRP and CS injections for knee OA were included. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched through June 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A random effects model was used to calculate standardized mean difference with 95% confidence interval in WOMAC/VAS score (or subscores), comparing IA PRP to CS injections across studies. Results Included were eight studies and 648 patients, 443 (68%) were female, mean age 59 years, with a mean BMI of 28.4. Overall, the studies were considered at low risk of bias. Compared with CS injections, PRP was significantly better in reducing OA symptoms (pain, stiffness, functionality) at 3, 6 and 9 months post-intervention (P < 0.01). The greatest effect was observed at 6 and 9 months (− 0.78 (− 1.34 to − 0.23) standard mean deviations (SMD) and − 1.63 (− 2.14 to − 1.12) SMD respectively). At 6 months, this equates to an additional reduction of 9.51 in WOMAC or 0.97 on the VAS pain scales. At 6 months PRP allowed greater return to sporting activities than CS, measured by the KOOS subscale for sporting activity, of magnitude 9.7 (− 0.45 to 19.85) (P = 0.06). Triple injections of PRP, generally separated by a week, were superior to single injections over 12 months follow-up (P < 0.01). Conclusions IA-PRP injections produce superior outcomes when compared with CS injections for symptomatic management of knee OA, including improved pain management, less joint stiffness and better participation in exercise/sporting activity at 12 months follow-up. Giving three IA-PRP, with injections separated by a week, appears more effective than 1 IA-PRP injection. Prospero trial registration number CRD42020181928.

BackgroundInsufficient physical activity (PA) levels which increase the risk of chronic disease are reported by almost two-thirds of the population. More evidence is needed about how PA promotion can be effectively implemented in general practice (GP), particularly in socio-economically disadvantaged communities. One tool recommended for the assessment of PA in GP and supported by NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) is The General Practice Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPPAQ) but details of how it may be used and of its acceptability to practitioners and patients are limited. This study aims to examine aspects of GPPAQ administration in non-urgent patient contacts using different primary care electronic recording systems and to explore the views of health professionals regarding its use.MethodsFour general practices, selected because of their location within socio-economically disadvantaged areas, were invited to administer GPPAQs to patients, aged 35-75 years, attending non-urgent consultations, over two-week periods. They used different methods of administration and different electronic medical record systems (EMIS, Premiere, Vision). Participants’ (general practitioners (GPs), nurses and receptionists) views regarding GPPAQ use were explored via questionnaires and focus groups.ResultsOf 2,154 eligible consultations, 192 (8.9%) completed GPPAQs; of these 83 (43%) were categorised as inactive. All practices were located within areas ranked as being in the tertile of greatest socio-economic deprivation in Northern Ireland. GPs/nurses in two practices invited completion of the GPPAQ, receptionists did so in two. One practice used an electronic template; three used paper copies of the questionnaires.End-of-study questionnaires, completed by 11 GPs, 3 nurses and 2 receptionists and two focus groups, with GPs (n = 8) and nurses (n = 4) indicated that practitioners considered the GPPAQ easy to use but not in every consultation. Its use extended consultation time, particularly for patients with complex problems who could potentially benefit from PA promotion.ConclusionsGPs and nurses reported that the GPPAQ itself was an easy tool with which to assess PA levels in general practice and feasible to use in a range of electronic record systems but integration within routine practice is constrained by time and complex consultations. Further exploration of ways to facilitate PA promotion into practice is needed.

Neck strength systematic review 1 Injury reduction exercise programs which include neck exercises may reduce the incidence of sport-related head and neck injuries including concussion: A systematic review.

ObjectivesTo allow the implementation of effective injury and illness prevention programmes for road cyclists, we wanted to first identify the injury/illness burden to this group of athletes. We, therefore, undertook a systematic review of all reported injuries/illness in road cycling.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesIdentification of articles was achieved through a comprehensive search of: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Cochrane Library from inception until January 2020.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesStudies reporting injuries/illness in adults participating in road cycling. Cycling commuter studies were excluded from the analysis.MethodTwo review authors independently screened titles and abstracts for eligibility and trial quality. Initial search criteria returned 52 titles and abstracts to be reviewed, with 12 studies included after reviewing the full text articles.ResultsThe most common injuries sustained were abrasions, lacerations and haematomas accounting for 40–60% of the total injuries recorded. Fractures (6–15%) were the second most frequent type of injury. Head injuries (including concussions) accounted for 5–15% of injuries with musculotendinous injuries accounting for 2–17.5%. The upper limb was more frequently affected by injuries than the lower limb, with amateurs appearing to be at higher risk of injury/illness than professionals. Clavicle was the prevalent fracture, with patellofemoral syndrome the number one overuse diagnosis. No meta-analysis of the results was undertaken due to the inconsistent methods of reporting.ConclusionThis is the first systematic review of road cycling injuries. Injuries most often affected the upper limb, with clavicle being the most prevalent fracture and the most common overuse injury being patellofemoral syndrome.