An Investigation Into the Measurement of Injury Severity in Running-Related Injury Research: A Scoping Review.

Understanding injury severity is essential to inform injury prevention practice. The aims of this scoping review were to investigate how running-related injury (RRI) severity is measured, compare how it differs across studies, and examine whether it influences study outcomes (i.e., injury rates and risk factor identification). This scoping review was prospectively registered with Open Science Framework. A systematic electronic search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscuss, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases. Included studies were published in English between January 1980 and December 2023, investigated RRIs in adult running populations, and included a measure of injury severity. Results were extracted and collated. Sixty-six studies were included. Two predominant primary criteria are used to define injury severity: the extent of the effect on running and/or the extent of the physical description. When secondary definition criteria are considered, 13 variations of injury severity measurement are used. Two approaches are used to grade injury severity: a categorization approach or a continuous numerical scale. Overall, the measurement of RRI severity is relatively inconsistent across studies. Less than half of studies report incidence rates per level of injury severity, while none report specific risk factors across levels, making it difficult to determine if the approach to measuring injury severity influences these study outcomes. This lack of information is possibly contributing to inconsistent rates of RRIs reported, and the lack of clarity on risk factors.

Definitions and surveillance methods of running-related injuries: A scoping review.

Inconsistent and restricted definitions of injury have contributed to limitations in determining injury rates and identifying risk factors for running-related injuries (RRIs). The aim of this scoping review was to investigate the definitions and surveillance methods of RRIs. A systematic electronic search was performed using PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscuss, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases. Included studies were published in English between January 1980 and June 2023 which investigated RRIs in adult running populations, providing a definition for a general RRI. Results were extracted and collated. 204 articles were included. Three primary criteria were used to define RRIs: physical description, effect on training and medical intervention, while three secondary criteria are also associated with definitions: cause/onset of injury, location, and social consequences. Further descriptors and sub-descriptors form these criteria. The use of Boolean operators resulted in nine variations in definitions. Inconsistency is evident among definitions of RRIs. Injury definitions seem to be important for two main reasons: firstly, determining accurate injury rates, and secondly, in research examining risk factors. For the latter, definitions seem to be very limited, only capturing severe injuries and failing to recognise the full development process of RRIs, precluding the identification of conclusive risk factors. A potential two-approach solution is the initial use of a broad definition acting as a gatekeeper for identifying any potential injury, and follow-up with an extensive surveillance tool to capture the specific consequences of the varying severity of RRIs.

Psychoeducational interventions for people living with chronic communicable disease: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Psychoeducation is increasingly recognised for its value in facilitating adaption to a chronic disease diagnosis. This study aimed to synthesise available literature on the psychoeducation interventions available to adults living with chronic communicable disease. METHODS: PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, SocINDEX, PsycINFO and PsycArticles were systematically searched up to May 2023. Peer-reviewed studies, published in English, investigating the impact of psychoeducational interventions on adults living with chronic communicable disease were included, across a range of outcome measures. Narrative synthesis was performed. The Effective Public Health Practice Project tool and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool were used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: In total, 22 studies were included in the review. The majority (n=16) of study populations focused on people living with HIV, followed by hepatitis C (n=5) and genital herpes (n=1). Interventions were delivered online (n=2), via telephone (n=1) and in-person (n=19). The majority of interventions were delivered in group sessions (n=16) and studies emphasised the value of group cohesion for social support, encouraging participants to share their own knowledge in addition to standard didactic presentations. Four studies facilitated peer-led delivery of the psychoeducation. Studies aiming to improve psychological well-being were beneficial in reducing depressive symptoms and/or emotional distress or showed improvement in the participant group overall. There was some evidence to suggest psychoeducation can improve readiness to attend treatment and medication adherence. CONCLUSION: The findings of this review highlight potential benefits of psychoeducation but indicate more robust clinical trials will be required to examine their effectiveness and elucidate the mechanisms by which they best operate. Future interventions incorporating a broader focus on resilience enhancement and coping skills specific to stigmatisation could more comprehensively serve the needs of adults living with chronic communicable disease, particularly with HIV. The role of peer support in group psychoeducation merits further exploration. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021243058.