A sustainable structure for jockey injury data management for the North American horse racing industry

Is Injury an Occupational Hazard for Horseracing Staff?

Occupational health is a key priority for the horseracing industry, yet little research on occupational injuries exists. This study investigated the prevalence and the effect of injury in British horseracing staff during a 12-month period. An online retrospective survey was answered by 352 participants, identifying self-reported injury prevalence, injury management practices and attitudes towards workplace injury reporting. Chi Squared tests for independence were undertaken. A total of 310 (88.1%) staff reported injuries; risk factors for injury type included self-perceived job security, working hours, and perceived job control. Physical limitations, loss of confidence, workplace changes, and lifestyle implications were reported as consequences of injury. A total of 75.3% (n = 134) of staff were likely to seek time-off following fractures, but only 48.6% (n = 86) would take time-off for concussion. Attitudes towards injury management were influenced by financial circumstances, perceived staff shortages, previous injury experiences, and perceived employer expectations. The high self-reported injury prevalence could result in decreased workforce efficiency, poor physical health, and negative implications on retention and career longevity. The perception of invisible injuries, i.e., concussion, and subsequent management, should be of immediate concern to racing organizations. This paper identifies recommendations to enhance the safety and wellbeing of horseracing staff.

A Cross Sectional Survey of International Horse-Racing Authorities on Injury Data Collection and Reporting Practices For Professional Jockeys

Jockey injuries are common in professional horse-racing and can result in life-threatening or career-ending outcomes. Robust injury data are essential to understand the circumstances of injury occurrence and ultimately identify prevention opportunities. This study aimed to identify jockey injury surveillance practices of international horse-racing authorities (HRAs) and the specific data items collected and reported by each HRA. A cross-sectional survey of representatives (e.g. Chief Medical Officer) from international HRAs was conducted. An online and paper questionnaire was designed comprised of 32 questions. Questions considered the barriers and facilitators to data collection within each HRA, and where available, what data were collected and reported by HRAs. Representatives from 15 international racing jurisdictions were included, of which 12 reported collection of race day injuries or falls, using varied definitions of medical attention and time loss. Six HRAs did not have a definition for a jockey injury, and eight HRAs had no parameters for describing injury severity. Race day exposure was collected by two HRAs. Results were commonly presented by HRAs as the number of injuries (n = 9/15) or proportion of injured jockeys (n = 6/15). The lack of a designated role for collection, collation and reporting of data was the main barrier for injury surveillance. Twelve HRAs agreed that mandatory collection would be a strong facilitator to improving practice. Enhancement and standardization of international jockey injury surveillance is required to move forward with evidence informed prevention. Concurrent investigation of how reporting practices can be best supported within existing HRA structures is recommended.

A narrative review of the risk factors and psychological consequences of injury in horseracing stable staff

Horseracing stable staff have a multifaceted role, acting as care givers, skilled athletes and equine experts, resulting in inherent high emotional, physical and mental demands. Despite these demands, and reports of significant injury risk to those working in racing at ground level, there has been no research investigating the psychological risk factors for injury in UK racing stable staff and how psychological responses to injury may affect long term mental health and wellbeing. With mental health at the forefront of industry consideration, this narrative review aimed to reflect on the current literature to propose occupational, life and social stressors that may be increasing the risk of injury in racing staff. In addition, this review aims to apply current injury theory to propose whether stable staff are at heightened risk of injury mismanagement. A literature search was undertaken to investigate the psychological aspects of injury, using five search engines and the following key words: injury, psychological responses, occupational, sport and/or athlete, equestrian, horseracing, jockey, risk of injury, rehabilitation, and injury minimisalisation. Articles were selected based on relevance to review aims, and research findings were synthesised under two primary areas: predictors of injury (working hours, job security, job control, life stressors, mental health and drug misuse) and responses to injury (positive and negative responses to injury, the role of social support, rehabilitation adherence, and injury minimalisation). Whilst there are limitations to narrative reviews, this study provides a novel interpretation of injury risk and responses specific to staff working in horseracing, where injury-related challenges are currently a key focus for sector employees, managerial staff and racing organisations. Recommendations for further research have been made to direct the advancement of knowledge in the field.

Medicine in the Sport of Horse Racing

Horseracing is among the most popular and increasingly lucrative industry sports in the nation. The average jockey must control a thoroughbred horse 10 times their weight that may act unpredictably whether at rest or full gallop resulting in falls, kicks, or even biting injuries. Despite the risks, jockeys do not have access to the same quality of medical care that is standard in similarly profitable sports organizations. Beyond the mental and physical demands of training and performance endured by any professional athlete, jockeys are confronted with health challenges unique to their sport. In this review of the literature, we aim to educate sports medicine physicians regarding the underlying causes of injuries, describe injury management, and make recommendations for appropriate preventive strategies. Overall, there is a void of literature, and so our authors offer expert opinion and encourage others to get involved in making this a safer sport.

Jockey Perception of Shoe and Surface Effects on Hoof-Ground Interactions and Implications for Safety in the Galloping Thoroughbred Racehorse

Riding racehorses is a high-risk profession and optimizing safety alongside performance is paramount. Horseshoes play a critical role in providing traction with the ground surface and are therefore a major determinant of safety. However, the subjective perceptions of expert riders influence attitudes towards using different shoes and must be taken into consideration before any changes may be implemented. This study used a questionnaire-based method to evaluate jockey opinion of four shoeing conditions (aluminum, steel, GluShu, and barefoot) trialed at gallop over turf and artificial surfaces. Nine Lickert-style questions explored impact, cushioning, responsiveness, grip, uniformity, smoothness of ride, safety, adaptation period, and overall rating for each shoe-surface combination. A total of 94 questionnaires, based on 15 horse-rider pairs, were assessed using descriptive statistics and linear mixed models performed in SPSS (P < .05). Data indicate that shoe type significantly affected all question responses, with the exception of impact. Surface-type significantly affected perception of grip and safety. Overall, jockeys showed a preference for aluminum and steel shoes across both artificial and turf tracks. These rated "excellent" and were considered to be "very supportive" in approximately 80% of trials, with a 100% "active" response, good grip, and a quick adaptation period. In contrast, barefoot and GluShu conditions were generally considered "moderately supportive," with barefoot appearing favorable on the artificial surface. On turf, barefoot was deemed the least smooth and the only condition that jockeys sometimes marked "unsafe" (17% of responses). Future work aims to investigate the relationship between jockey opinion and hoof kinematic data.