Self-reported concussion history among midwestern skiers and snowboarders

Aim

To assess the rate of self-reported concussion in midwestern skiers and snowboarders.

Patients

Recreational skiers and snowboarders between the ages of 14 and 69 years during a single winter ski season (2020-2021) at a ski area in Wisconsin, USA.

Methods

Survey study.

Results

Among this survey population (n = 161), 9.32 and 19.25% reported one or more diagnosed concussion and suspected concussion respectively as a result of a skiing- or snowboarding-related incident. Skiers and snowboarders that self-identified as advanced, those who utilized terrain park features, and those that participated in freestyle competition had significantly higher self-reported rates of concussion.

Conclusion

Self-reported concussion history indicates a concussion prevalence that is higher than expected based on previous studies. Participants reported significantly more suspected concussions than diagnosed concussions, indicating a possible issue with underreporting in this population.

The Influence of Protective Headgear on the Visual Field of Recreational-Level Skiers

The benefit of protective headgear for recreational skiers is an ongoing debate in the snow sports industry, and there are a lot of opposing opinions. Due to the dynamic conditions in which winter sports are performed, athletes demand rapid and constant processing of visual information. A sufficient level of anticipation helps athletes to properly position themselves to reduce the forces transferred to the head or even move to avoid a collision. To objectively identify the impact of protective headgear on the visual field when skiing, it is necessary to conduct suitable measurements. The sample consisted of 43 recreational-level skiers (27 M, 16 F; age 31.6 ± 8.23 years). A predefined testing protocol on an ortoreter was used to assess the visual field for three conditions of wearing protective headgear. Differences in perceived visual stimuli between the three conditions were evaluated by repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Based on the observed results, it can be concluded that the combination of wearing a ski helmet and ski goggles significantly negatively influences visual performance in a way that the visual field is narrowed, for both helmet users and non-users, only when comparing the tested conditions. When comparing helmet users and non-users, there are no differences in the amount of visual impairment; therefore, the habit of wearing a helmet does not influence the ability of perceiving visual stimuli.

Different injury patterns after snowboard in children and adolescents

Background

Snowboarding is a very common sport especially among young adults. Common injuries are hand, wrist, shoulder and ankle injuries.

Purpose

of this study was to analyze different injury pattern in children and young adults comparing with adults.

Methods

Patients who were admitted for ambulant or stationary treatment as a result of injury practicing snowboard received a questionnaire and were divided into three groups (children, young adults and adults) according to their age. Between october 2002 and may 2007 1929 injured snowboard sportsmen were included in the study. Data such as location, date and time of accident as well as information about the slope were carried out. In addition snowboard skills were classified and patients were questioned whether they wore special protectors.

Results

32.5% of injured patients were female (n = 626) and 67.5% male (n = 1303) with a mean age of patients of 21.9 (7-66) years. 13% of all patients were in group I (children), 19.2% in group II (young adults) and 67.8% in group III (adults).Most common injuries with 60% of all accidents were injuries of the hand wrist especially in children beginning with snowboard sports. Injuries on the regular track were most common followed by jumps in the kicker park and rails in the fun-park. 20.6% in group I, 13.6% in group II and 12.8% group III did not wear any protectors.

Conclusion

Children and adolescents presented different injury patterns than adults. Young participants of up to 14 years of age are endangered especially during the first days of learning this sport. Further development of protectors with regard to biomechanical characteristics is important to achieve an optimal protective effect.

Level of evidence

2b.

What are the risk factors for injuries and injury prevention strategies for skiers and snowboarders in terrain parks and half-pipes? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise the current evidence regarding the risk factors, the injury prevention strategies and the profile of injured skiers and snowboarders in terrain parks (TPs) and half-pipes (HPs).

DESIGN

Systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

Literature searches from six electronic databases and manual searches were performed.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Inclusion criteria were: (1) publication based on original data; (2) injuries sustained in TPs or HPs; (3) recreational skiing or snowboarding injuries; (4) observational or experimental study design with a comparison group.

RESULTS

No study explored the risk factors in HPs or the prevention strategies in TPs or HPs. From the literature retrieved, there is strong evidence that skiing or snowboarding in a TP is a risk factor for head, neck, back and severe injuries. Two papers assessed the risk factors for injuries in TPs, mainly demonstrating that features promoting aerial manoeuvres or a large drop to the ground were associated with higher feature-specific injury rates. The profile of injured skiers and snowboarders in TPs described in the literature suggested some evidence of associations between factors including activity, sex, skill level, helmet use, age and TP injuries.

SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review demonstrates the need for studies identifying the risk factors for injuries to skiers and snowboarders and on interventions to reduce the risk of injury in TPs and HPs. Studies addressing the issue of TP design should be considered.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016045206.