Can a Psychologic Profile Predict Successful Return to Full Duty After a Musculoskeletal Injury?

BACKGROUND: Psychologic variables have been shown to have a strong relationship with recovery from injury and return to work or sports. The extent to which psychologic variables predict successful return to work in military settings is unknown. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In a population of active duty soldiers, (1) can a psychologic profile determine the risk of injury after return to full duty? (2) Do psychologic profiles differ between soldiers sustaining injuries in the spine (thoracic or lumbar) and those with injuries to the lower extremities? METHODS: Psychologic variables were assessed in soldiers returning to full, unrestricted duty after a recent musculoskeletal injury. Most of these were noncombat injuries from work-related physical activity. Between February 2016 and September 2017, 480 service members who were cleared to return to duty after musculoskeletal injuries (excluding those with high-velocity collisions, pregnancy, or amputation) were enrolled in a study that tracked subsequent injuries over the following year. Of those, we considered individuals with complete 12-month follow-up data as potentially eligible for analysis. Based on that, approximately 2% (8 of 480) were excluded because they did not complete baseline surveys, approximately 2% (11 of 480) were separated from the military during the follow-up period and had incomplete injury data, 1% (3 of 480) were excluded for not serving in the Army branch of the military, and approximately 2% (8 of 480) were excluded because they were not cleared to return to full duty. This resulted in 450 soldiers analyzed. Individuals were 86% (385 of 450) men; 74% (331 of 450) had lower extremity injuries and 26% (119 of 450) had spinal injuries, including soft tissue aches and pains (for example, strains and sprains), fractures, and disc herniations. Time-loss injury within 1 year was the primary outcome. While creating and validating a new prediction model using only psychological variables, 19 variables were assessed for nonlinearity, further factor selection was performed through elastic net, and models were internally validated through 2000 bootstrap iterations. Performance was deciphered through calibration, discrimination (area under the curve [AUC]), R 2 , and calibration in the large. Calibration assesses predicted versus actual risk by plotting the x and y intersection of these values; the more similar predicted risk values are to actual ones, the closer the slope of the line formed by the intersection points of all subjects is to equaling "1" (optimal calibration). Likewise, perfect discrimination (predicted injured versus actual injured) presents as an AUC of 1. Perfect calibration in the large would equal 0 because it represents the average predicted risk versus the actual outcome rate. Sensitivity analyses stratified groups by prior injury region (thoracic or lumbar spine and lower extremity) as well as the severity of injury by days of limited duty (moderate [7-27 days] and severe [28 + days]). RESULTS: A model comprising primarily psychologic variables including depression, anxiety, kinesiophobia, fear avoidance beliefs, and mood did not adequately determine the risk of subsequent injury. The derived logistic prediction model had 18 variables: R 2 = 0.03, calibration = 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30 to 0.97), AUC = 0.62 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.72), and calibration in the large = -0.17. Baseline psychologic profiles between body regions differed only for depression severity (mean difference 1 [95% CI 0 to 1]; p = 0.04), with greater mean scores for spine injuries than for lower extremity injuries. Performance was poor for those with prior spine injuries compared with those with lower extremity injuries (AUC 0.50 [95% CI 0.42 to 0.58] and 0.63 [95% CI 0.57 to 0.69], respectively) and moderate versus severe injury during the 1-year follow-up (AUC 0.61 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.71] versus 0.64 [95% CI 0.64 to 0.74], respectively). CONCLUSION: The psychologically based model poorly predicted subsequent injury. This study does not minimize the value of assessing the psychologic profiles of injured athletes, but rather suggests that models looking to identify injury risk should consider a multifactorial approach that also includes other nonpsychologic factors such as injury history. Future studies should refine the most important psychologic constructs that can add the most value and precision to multifactorial models aimed at identifying the risk of injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic study.

Unaccounted for Pitch Volume Among Adolescent Baseball Pitchers During a Travel Baseball Season.

OBJECTIVE: The primary aim was to compare differences in live game pitch counts (LGPCs) with all pitch counts (APCs) over the course of a youth baseball season. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal study. SETTING: Midwest youth travel baseball. PARTICIPANTS: Ten male baseball players part of a youth baseball travel team. VARIABLES: Demographic data, pitch counts (practice, game, warm-up, and bullpen), innings pitched, and recommended rest days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Live pitch counts compared with APCs and the relationship to recommended rest days. RESULTS: During the season, 7866 pitches were recorded among 9 pitchers. By using the LGPC method alone, 42.5% of the pitches were unaccounted for. When considering age-specific rest days suggested by Pitch Smart Guidelines (PSGs), there were 104 rest days unaccounted for by using the live game pitch method. CONCLUSION: There is a high number of unaccounted for pitches and an underestimation of rest days per outing when using live game methods. Revisions to the PSGs that include all pitches should be considered to accurately reflect pitching volume, which may be associated with the rising rate of injuries among these athletes.

Impact of Prolonged Sport Stoppage on Knee Injuries in High School Athletes: An Ecological Study.

CONTEXT: In March 2020, public health concerns resulted in school closure throughout the United States. The prolonged sport cessation may affect knee injury risk in high school athletes. The purpose of this study was to describe and compare risk of knee injuries in high school athletes during 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 academic years, and stratify by gender, severity, mechanism of injury, injury type, and knee anatomic region. DESIGN: Historical-prospective cohort study. METHODS: This historical-prospective cohort study included 176 schools in 6 states matched by sport participation in control and COVID years from July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2021. Injury rates per 1000 athletes per year were calculated with 95% confidence intervals. A negative binomial regression was performed to assess potential differences in knee injuries between academic years. RESULTS: 94,847 and 72,521 high school athletes participated in the 2019-2020 (19-20) and 2020-2021 (20-21) seasons. Knee injury risk was higher in the 20-21 season (19-20: 28.89% [27.82-29.96]; 20-21: 33.82% [32.50-35.14]). Risk increased for male athletes from 2019-2020 to 2020-2021 (19-20: 29.42% [28.01-30.83]; 20-21: 40.32% [38.89-41.75]). Female knee injury risk was similar between years (19-20: 25.78% [24.29-27.27]; 20-21: 26.03% [24.31-27.75]). Knee injuries increased by a ratio of 1.2 ([95% CI, 1.1-1.3], P < .001) during 2020-2021. CONCLUSIONS: Knee injury risk and relative risk increased among males in 2020-2021. Results indicate changes in knee injury risk following return from COVID shelter in place among high school athletes and implicate potential negative downstream effects of interrupted sports training and participation on high school injury risk.

Sample size requirements are not being considered in studies developing prediction models for binary outcomes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Having an appropriate sample size is important when developing a clinical prediction model. We aimed to review how sample size is considered in studies developing a prediction model for a binary outcome. METHODS: We searched PubMed for studies published between 01/07/2020 and 30/07/2020 and reviewed the sample size calculations used to develop the prediction models. Using the available information, we calculated the minimum sample size that would be needed to estimate overall risk and minimise overfitting in each study and summarised the difference between the calculated and used sample size. RESULTS: A total of 119 studies were included, of which nine studies provided sample size justification (8%). The recommended minimum sample size could be calculated for 94 studies: 73% (95% CI: 63-82%) used sample sizes lower than required to estimate overall risk and minimise overfitting including 26% studies that used sample sizes lower than required to estimate overall risk only. A similar number of studies did not meet the ≥ 10EPV criteria (75%, 95% CI: 66-84%). The median deficit of the number of events used to develop a model was 75 [IQR: 234 lower to 7 higher]) which reduced to 63 if the total available data (before any data splitting) was used [IQR:225 lower to 7 higher]. Studies that met the minimum required sample size had a median c-statistic of 0.84 (IQR:0.80 to 0.9) and studies where the minimum sample size was not met had a median c-statistic of 0.83 (IQR: 0.75 to 0.9). Studies that met the ≥ 10 EPP criteria had a median c-statistic of 0.80 (IQR: 0.73 to 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: Prediction models are often developed with no sample size calculation, as a consequence many are too small to precisely estimate the overall risk. We encourage researchers to justify, perform and report sample size calculations when developing a prediction model.

Barriers and facilitators to implementation of musculoskeletal injury mitigation programmes for military service members around the world: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Musculoskeletal injury (MSK-I) mitigation and prevention programmes (MSK-IMPPs) have been developed and implemented across militaries worldwide. Although programme efficacy is often reported, development and implementation details are often overlooked, limiting their scalability, sustainability and effectiveness. This scoping review aimed to identify the following in military populations: (1) barriers and facilitators to implementing and scaling MSK-IMPPs; (2) gaps in MSK-IMPP research and (3) future research priorities. METHODS: A scoping review assessed literature from inception to April 2022 that included studies on MSK-IMPP implementation and/or effectiveness in military populations. Barriers and facilitators to implementing these programmes were identified. RESULTS: From 132 articles, most were primary research studies (90; 68.2%); the remainder were review papers (42; 31.8%). Among primary studies, 3 (3.3%) investigated only women, 62 (69%) only men and 25 (27.8%) both. Barriers included limited resources, lack of stakeholder engagement, competing military priorities and equipment-related factors. Facilitators included strong stakeholder engagement, targeted programme design, involvement/proximity of MSK-I experts, providing MSK-I mitigation education, low burden on resources and emphasising end-user acceptability. Research gaps included variability in reported MSK-I outcomes and no consensus on relevant surveillance metrics and definitions. CONCLUSION: Despite a robust body of literature, there is a dearth of information about programme implementation; specifically, barriers or facilitators to success. Additionally, variability in outcomes and lack of consensus on MSK-I definitions may affect the development, implementation evaluation and comparison of MSK-IMPPs. There is a need for international consensus on definitions and optimal data reporting elements when conducting injury risk mitigation research in the military.

Oxidized Zirconium Versus Cobalt Chromium for Primary TKA: No Difference in Midterm Revision Rates From the American Joint Replacement Registry.

BACKGROUND: Cobalt chromium (CoCr) is the most commonly used material in TKA; however, the use of oxidized zirconium (OxZr) implants has increased. The advantages to this material demonstrated in basic science studies have not been borne out in clinical studies to date. QUESTION/PURPOSE: In the setting of the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR), how do revision rates differ between CoCr and OxZr after primary TKA? METHODS: The AJRR was accessed for all primary TKAs performed between 2012 and 2020 for osteoarthritis, resulting in 441,605 procedures (68,506 with OxZr and 373,099 with CoCr). The AJRR is the largest joint replacement registry worldwide and collects procedure-specific details, making it ideal for large-scale comparisons of implant materials in the United States. Competing risk survival analyses were used to evaluate the all-cause revision rates of primary TKAs, comparing CoCr and OxZr implants. Data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services claims from 2012 to 2017 were also cross-referenced to capture additional revisions from other institutions. Revision rates were tabulated and subclassified by indication. Multivariate Cox regression was used to account for confounding variables such as age, gender, region, and hospital size. RESULTS: After controlling for confounding variables, there were no differences between the OxZr and CoCr groups in terms of the rate of all-cause revision at a mean follow-up of 46 ± 23 months and 44 ± 24 months for CoCr and OxZr implants, respectively (hazard ratio 1.055 [95% confidence interval 0.979 to 1.137]; p = 0.16) The univariate analysis demonstrated increased rates of revisions for pain and instability in the OxZr group (p = 0.003 and p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest there is no difference in all-cause revision between OxZr and CoCr implants in the short-term to mid-term. However, further long-term in vivo studies are needed to monitor the safety and all-cause revision rate of OxZr implants compared with those of CoCr implants. OxZr implants may be favorable in patients who have sensitivity to metal. Despite similar short-term to mid-term all-cause revision rates to CoCr implants, because of the limitations of this study, definitive recommendations for or against the use of OxZr cannot be made. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Higher rates of concussion following COVID-19 infection in high school athletes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare concussion rates (CRs) over one academic year in high school athletes with and without a COVID-19 infection prior to concussion. METHODS: Illness and concussion were prospectively reported for male and female high school athletes across six states over one academic year in the Players Health Rehab surveillance system. Concussion was truncated to 60 days following recovery and return to sport from COVID-19. CRs were estimated per 1000 athletes per academic year and stratified by those who tested positive for COVID-19 infection (with COVID-19) and those who did not (no COVID-19). Poisson regression analyses estimated rate ratio (RR) of concussion controlling for state, gender and an offset of the log athlete participation (with COVID-19 and no COVID-19). RESULTS: Of 72 522 athletes, 430 COVID-19 infections and 1273 concussions were reported. The CR was greater in athletes who reported COVID-19 (CR=74.4/1000 athletes/year, 95% CI 49.6 to 99.3) compared with those who did not (CR=17.2, 95% CI 16.3 to 18.2). Athletes with recent COVID-19 had a threefold higher rate of concussion (RR=3.1, 95% CI 2.0 to 4.7). CONCLUSION: Athletes returning from COVID-19 had higher CRs than those who did not experience COVID-19. This may be related to ongoing COVID-19 sequelae or deconditioning related to reduced training and competition load during the illness and when returning to sport. Further research is needed to understand the association of recent COVID-19 infection and concussion in order to inform preventive strategies.

Arm injury in youth baseball players: a 10-year cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Arm injuries are commonly encountered in baseball as young athletes play into adulthood. The purpose of this study was to examine the incidence of arm injury and risk for surgery in adolescent baseball players followed over a 10-year period from scholastic, age-group, and travel baseball leagues through their highest level of competition. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted enrolling middle and high school baseball players in 2010-2012, then followed for 10 years or until retirement from competitive baseball. Players were included if fully participating in team activities at the time of preseason study enrollment. Players with prior arm (shoulder or elbow) surgery or those diagnosed with time loss arm injury within the past year were excluded. Only shoulder and elbow overuse problems resulting in time-loss from sport and medical attention from a sports medicine physician or orthopedic surgeon were documented as injuries in this study. Musculoskeletal overuse injuries were classified based on the orchard injury classification system. Incidence proportion and risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for initial injury and injuries requiring surgery were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 261 pitchers (age: 14.2 ± 2.6 years; follow-up: 4.2 ± 2.7 years) were enrolled. Twenty percent of the cohort was followed for ≥7 years. The overall injury incidence was 25.6/100 athletes (95% CI 21-31) with a cumulative surgical incidence of 5.4/100 athletes (95% CI 3.2-8.8). The risk of experiencing shoulder injury (n = 25) and elbow injury (n = 38) were similar (n = 38) (RR 0.7, 95% CI 0.4-1.1). The athletes also presented with a similar frequency of requiring surgery regardless of the injured body part. However, the risk of surgery in those playing beyond the high school level was 4.3 times greater (95% CI 1.2-15.0) than those only playing high school. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to follow a large cohort of youth baseball players as they progress, showing a relatively high arm injury incidence. Shoulder and elbow injury incidence was similar but surgical risk increased playing beyond high school, specifically for the elbow. The high injury frequency and burden of care required by young baseball players as reported in this study is concerning, and strategies to reduce injury should be investigated.

Improving Clinical Utility of Real-World Prediction Models: Updating Through Recalibration.

ABSTRACT: Bullock, GS, Shanley, E, Thigpen, CA, Arden, NK, Noonan, TK, Kissenberth, MJ, Wyland, DJ, and Collins, GS. Improving clinical utility of real-world prediction models: updating through recalibration. J Strength Cond Res 37(5): 1057-1063, 2023-Prediction models can aid clinicians in identifying at-risk athletes. However, sport and clinical practice patterns continue to change, causing predictive drift and potential suboptimal prediction model performance. Thus, there is a need to temporally recalibrate previously developed baseball arm injury models. The purpose of this study was to perform temporal recalibration on a previously developed injury prediction model and assess model performance in professional baseball pitchers. An arm injury prediction model was developed on data from a prospective cohort from 2009 to 2019 on minor league pitchers. Data for the 2015-2019 seasons were used for temporal recalibration and model performance assessment. Temporal recalibration constituted intercept-only and full model redevelopment. Model performance was investigated by assessing Nagelkerke's R-square, calibration in the large, calibration, and discrimination. Decision curves compared the original model, temporal recalibrated model, and current best evidence-based practice. One hundred seventy-eight pitchers participated in the 2015-2019 seasons with 1.63 arm injuries per 1,000 athlete exposures. The temporal recalibrated intercept model demonstrated the best discrimination (0.81 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73, 0.88]) and R-square (0.32) compared with original model (0.74 [95% CI: 0.69, 0.80]; R-square: 0.32) and the redeveloped model (0.80 [95% CI: 0.73, 0.87]; R-square: 0.30). The temporal recalibrated intercept model demonstrated an improved net benefit of 0.34 compared with current best evidence-based practice. The temporal recalibrated intercept model demonstrated the best model performance and clinical utility. Updating prediction models can account for changes in sport training over time and improve professional baseball arm injury outcomes.

Methodological conduct of prognostic prediction models developed using machine learning in oncology: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Describe and evaluate the methodological conduct of prognostic prediction models developed using machine learning methods in oncology. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review in MEDLINE and Embase between 01/01/2019 and 05/09/2019, for studies developing a prognostic prediction model using machine learning methods in oncology. We used the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) statement, Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST) and CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) to assess the methodological conduct of included publications. Results were summarised by modelling type: regression-, non-regression-based and ensemble machine learning models. RESULTS: Sixty-two publications met inclusion criteria developing 152 models across all publications. Forty-two models were regression-based, 71 were non-regression-based and 39 were ensemble models. A median of 647 individuals (IQR: 203 to 4059) and 195 events (IQR: 38 to 1269) were used for model development, and 553 individuals (IQR: 69 to 3069) and 50 events (IQR: 17.5 to 326.5) for model validation. A higher number of events per predictor was used for developing regression-based models (median: 8, IQR: 7.1 to 23.5), compared to alternative machine learning (median: 3.4, IQR: 1.1 to 19.1) and ensemble models (median: 1.7, IQR: 1.1 to 6). Sample size was rarely justified (n = 5/62; 8%). Some or all continuous predictors were categorised before modelling in 24 studies (39%). 46% (n = 24/62) of models reporting predictor selection before modelling used univariable analyses, and common method across all modelling types. Ten out of 24 models for time-to-event outcomes accounted for censoring (42%). A split sample approach was the most popular method for internal validation (n = 25/62, 40%). Calibration was reported in 11 studies. Less than half of models were reported or made available. CONCLUSIONS: The methodological conduct of machine learning based clinical prediction models is poor. Guidance is urgently needed, with increased awareness and education of minimum prediction modelling standards. Particular focus is needed on sample size estimation, development and validation analysis methods, and ensuring the model is available for independent validation, to improve quality of machine learning based clinical prediction models.

Pathologic characterization of canine multiple system degeneration in the Ibizan hound.

Canine multiple system degeneration (CMSD) is a progressive hereditary neurodegenerative disorder commonly characterized by neuronal degeneration and loss in the cerebellum, olivary nuclei, substantia nigra, and caudate nuclei. In this article, we describe 3 cases of CMSD in Ibizan hounds. All patients exhibited marked cerebellar ataxia and had cerebellar atrophy on magnetic resonance imaging. At necropsy, all cases showed varying degrees of cerebellar atrophy, and 2 cases had gross cavitation of the caudate nuclei. Histologic findings included severe degeneration and loss of all layers of the cerebellum and neuronal loss and degeneration within the olivary nuclei, substantia nigra, and caudate nuclei. Pedigree analysis indicated an autosomal recessive mode of inheritance, but the causative gene in this breed is yet to be identified. CMSD resembles human multiple system atrophy and warrants further investigation.

Long-term quality of life, work limitation, physical activity, economic cost and disease burden following ACL and meniscal injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis for the OPTIKNEE consensus.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the long-term health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL), work limitation, physical activity, health/economic cost and disease burden of traumatic ACL and/or meniscal injury. Findings will inform OPTIKNEE evidence-based consensus recommendations. DESIGN: Random-effects meta-analysis evaluated HRQoL (SF-36/SF-12/VR-12 Physical Component Scores (PCS) and Mental Component Scores (MCS), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D)) stratified by time postinjury, and pooled mean differences (95% CI) between ACL-injured and uninjured controls. Other outcomes were synthesised descriptively. Risk-of-bias (RoB) and certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) were assessed. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL searched inception: 22 November 2021. ELIGIBILITY: Studies reporting HRQoL, work limitations, physical activity levels, health/economic costs or disease burden, ≥2 years post-ACL and/or meniscal injury. RESULTS: Fifty studies were included (10 high-RoB, 28 susceptible-to-some-bias and 12 low-RoB). Meta-analysis (27 studies, very low certainty of evidence) estimated a pooled mean (95% CI) PCS of 52.4 (51.4 to 53.4) and MCS of 54.0 (53.0 to 55.0) 2-14 years post-ACL injury. Pooled PCS scores were worse >10 years (50.8 (48.7 to 52.9)) compared with 2-5 years (53.9 (53.1 to 54.7)) postinjury. Excluding high-RoB studies, PCS scores were worse in ACL-injured compared with uninjured controls (-1.5 (-2.9 to -0.1)). Six studies (low certainty of evidence) informed a pooled EQ-5D score of 0.83 (0.81 to 0.84). Some individuals experienced prolonged work absenteeism and modified activities ≥2 years post-ACL injury. ACL injury was associated with significant direct and indirect costs, and early ACL reconstruction may be less cost-effective than rehabilitation. Only three studies evaluated meniscal injury outcomes (all evaluated HRQoL). CONCLUSION: There is a very-low certainty of evidence that PCS scores ≥2 years post-ACL injury are worse than uninjured controls and decline over time, whereas MCS scores remain high. ACL injury can result in prolonged work absenteeism and high health/economic costs. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term burden of traumatic meniscal injury.

OPTIKNEE 2022: consensus recommendations to optimise knee health after traumatic knee injury to prevent osteoarthritis.

The goal of the OPTIKNEE consensus is to improve knee and overall health, to prevent osteoarthritis (OA) after a traumatic knee injury. The consensus followed a seven-step hybrid process. Expert groups conducted 7 systematic reviews to synthesise the current evidence and inform recommendations on the burden of knee injuries; risk factors for post-traumatic knee OA; rehabilitation to prevent post-traumatic knee OA; and patient-reported outcomes, muscle function and functional performance tests to monitor people at risk of post-traumatic knee OA. Draft consensus definitions, and clinical and research recommendations were generated, iteratively refined, and discussed at 6, tri-weekly, 2-hour videoconferencing meetings. After each meeting, items were finalised before the expert group (n=36) rated the level of appropriateness for each using a 9-point Likert scale, and recorded dissenting viewpoints through an anonymous online survey. Seven definitions, and 8 clinical recommendations (who to target, what to target and when, rehabilitation approach and interventions, what outcomes to monitor and how) and 6 research recommendations (research priorities, study design considerations, what outcomes to monitor and how) were voted on. All definitions and recommendations were rated appropriate (median appropriateness scores of 7-9) except for two subcomponents of one clinical recommendation, which were rated uncertain (median appropriateness score of 4.5-5.5). Varying levels of evidence supported each recommendation. Clinicians, patients, researchers and other stakeholders may use the definitions and recommendations to advocate for, guide, develop, test and implement person-centred evidence-based rehabilitation programmes following traumatic knee injury, and facilitate data synthesis to reduce the burden of knee post-traumatic knee OA.

Editorial Commentary: The Nonoperative Instability Severity Index Score Can, in Part, Help to Predict Failure After Nonoperative Management of Anterior Shoulder Instability: Fix Them All Versus Wait and See?

The optimal management of anterior shoulder instability remains a heated topic of debate, particularly after first-time shoulder dislocation. From expedited rehabilitation to arthroscopic Bankart repair and Latarjet coracoid transfer, the shoulder community has staunchly defended its approach with carefully tailored data describing patient satisfaction, instability recurrence, revision surgery, and timeline to return to play or preinjury activity. However, not all patients require surgical stabilization, and a "wait-and-see" approach can often result in favorable outcome. The Nonoperative Instability Severity Index Score has been proposed as a unique tool to stratify risk for failure among athletes after an anterior shoulder instability event. While not a standalone tool for predicting further shoulder dislocation in a broader athletic population, the Nonoperative Instability Severity Index Score reflects a movement toward personalized medicine, where clinical decision making is executed on the individual level based on unique risk factors and circumstances.

Biceps Tenodesis Has Greater Expected Value Than Repair for Isolated Type II SLAP Tears: A Meta-analysis and Expected-Value Decision Analysis.

PURPOSE: To use an expected-value decision analysis to determine the optimal treatment decision between repair and biceps tenodesis (BT) for an isolated type II SLAP injury. METHODS: An expected-value decision analysis with sensitivity analysis was performed to systematically quantify the clinical decision. To determine outcome probabilities, a decision tree was constructed (repair vs BT) and a meta-analysis was conducted. To determine outcome utilities, we evaluated 70 patients with a chief complaint of shoulder pain regarding age, sex, Shoulder Activity Level, and visual analog scale score in terms of potential outcome preferences. Statistical fold-back analysis was performed to determine the optimal treatment. One-way sensitivity analysis determined the effect of changing the reinjury rate on the expected value of BT. RESULTS: The overall expected value was 8.66 for BT versus 7.19 for SLAP repair. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that BT was the superior choice if reinjury rates were expected to be lower than 28%. Meta-analysis of 23 studies and 908 patients revealed that the probability of a "well" outcome was significantly greater for BT (87.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 74.9%-94.6%; I2 = 0.0%) than for SLAP repair (62.9%; 95% CI, 55.9%-69.3%; I2 = 65.9%; P = .0023). The rate of reinjury was 1.5% for BT (95% CI, 0.05%-33.8%; I2 = 0.0%) and 6.4% for repair (95% CI, 4.2%-9.6%; I2 = 24%), which was not statistically significantly different (P = .411). A total of 50 participants (mean age, 25.4 years [standard deviation, 8.9 years]; 76% male patients; 50% overhead athletes) met the inclusion criteria. Forty-six percent of participants had a high Shoulder Activity Level score. CONCLUSIONS: Decision analysis showed that BT is preferred over repair for an isolated type II SLAP tear based on greater expected value of BT versus repair. Meta-analysis showed more frequent favorable outcomes with BT. Surgeons can use this information to tailor discussions with patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, meta-analysis of Level I-IV studies.

A Higher Playing Standard, Bowling, and Intermittent Helmet Use Are Related to a Greater Odds of Injury or Concussion in Cricket.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if playing position, a higher playing standard, and nonhelmet use are related to an increased odds of joint-specific injury and concussion in cricket. DESIGN: Cross-sectional cohort. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-eight thousand one hundred fifty-two current or former recreational and high-performance cricketers registered on a national database were invited to participate in the Cricket Health and Wellbeing Study. Eligibility requirements were aged ≥18 years and played ≥1 cricket season. INDEPENDENT VARIABLES: Main playing position (bowler/batter/all-rounder), playing standard (high-performance/recreational), and helmet use (always/most of the time/occasionally/never). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cross-sectional questionnaire data included cricket-related injury (hip/groin, knee, ankle, shoulder, hand, back) resulting in ≥4 weeks of reduced exercise and self-reported concussion history. Crude and adjusted (adjusted for seasons played) odds ratios and 95% confidence interval (CIs) were estimated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 2294 participants (59% current cricketers; 97% male; age 52 ± 15 years; played 29 ± 15 seasons; 62% recreational cricketers), 47% reported cricket-related injury and 10% reported concussion. Bowlers had greater odds of hip/groin [odds ratio (95% CI), 1.9 (1.0-3.3)], knee [2.0 (1.4-2.8)], shoulder [2.9 (1.8-4.5)], and back [2.8 (1.7-4.4)] injury compared with batters. High-performance cricketers had greater odds of injury and concussion than recreational cricketers. Wearing a helmet most of the time [2.0 (1.4-3.0)] or occasionally [1.8 (1.3-2.6)] was related to higher odds of self-reported concussion compared with never wearing a helmet. Concussion rates were similar in cricketers who always and never wore a helmet. CONCLUSIONS: A higher playing standard and bowling (compared with batting) were associated with greater odds of injury. Wearing a helmet occasionally or most of the time was associated with higher odds of self-reported concussion compared with never wearing a helmet.

The Relationship Between Cricket Participation, Health, and Wellbeing: A Systematic Scoping Review.

Summarising and synthesising the evidence on cricket health and wellbeing can help inform cricket stakeholders and navigate future research directions. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between cricket participation, health and wellbeing at all ages and playing standards, and identify research gaps in the existing literature. A scoping review was performed from inception to March, 2020. Studies were included if they assessed a construct related to health and/or wellbeing in cricketers, available in English. 219 articles were eligible. Injury incidence per 1,000 player exposures ranged from 1.8-5.7 injuries. 48% of former cricketers experienced persistent joint pain. However, former cricketers reported greater physical activity levels and mental-components of quality of life compared to the general population. Heat injury/illness and skin cancer are concerns and require further research. Cricket participation is associated with an inherent injury risk, which may have negative implications for musculoskeletal health in later life. However, cricket participation is associated with high quality of life which can persist after retirement. Gaps in the literature include prospective studies on health and wellbeing of cricketers, female cricketers, injury prevention strategies, and the impact of cricket participation on metabolic health and lifetime physical activity.

Initial kinematic chain injuries increase hazard of subsequent arm injuries in professional baseball pitchers.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there are few studies that have evaluated the relationship between a lower extremity or trunk injury (kinematic chain) and subsequent arm injury. The purpose of this study was (1) to investigate the relationship between initial kinematic chain (lower extremity or trunk) injury and subsequent arm injury; and (2) to investigate the relationship between initial shoulder or elbow injury and subsequent arm injury. METHODS: A 7-year prospective injury risk study was conducted with Minor League Baseball pitchers. Pitches, pitching appearances, athlete exposures (AEs), and arm injuries (≥1-day time loss) were documented throughout the season. Cox survival analyses with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were performed. Confounders controlled for included age, body mass index, arm dominance, pitching role, previous arm injury, number of pitching appearances, and seasonal pitch load. RESULTS: A total of 297 pitchers participated (total player days = 85,270). Arm injury incidence was 11.4 arm injuries/10,000 AEs, and kinematic chain incidence was 5.2 injuries/10,000 AEs. Pitchers who sustained a kinematic chain injury demonstrated a greater hazard (2.6 [95% CI: 1.2, 5.6], P = .019) of sustaining an arm injury. Pitchers who sustained an initial shoulder injury demonstrated a greater hazard (9.3 [95% CI: 1.1, 83], P = .047) of sustaining a subsequent shoulder or elbow injury compared with pitchers who sustained an initial elbow injury. CONCLUSIONS: Pitchers who sustained an initial lower extremity or trunk injury demonstrated an increased subsequent arm injury hazard compared with pitchers who did not. Pitchers who sustained an initial shoulder injury demonstrated a greater hazard of sustaining a subsequent arm injury compared with pitchers who sustained an initial elbow injury. However, this secondary analysis should be interpreted with caution. Clinicians should monitor risk with workload accumulation, which may be related to pitching compensatory strategies in a fatigued state. Pitchers who sustain a shoulder injury should be evaluated and perform both shoulder and elbow rehabilitation strategies before return to sport.

Pitching Biomechanics Normative Values and Kinetic Differences by Competition Level.

Pitching kinematic and kinetic assessments require normative values to make valuable comparisons to athletic peers. The purpose of this research note was to report normative values of pitching kinematics and kinetics and to compare kinetics by competition level. A retrospective review was performed on three-dimensional baseball pitching biomechanical evaluations. Kinematics and kinetics were calculated. Pitchers were portioned into competition level groups. Kinetic group differences were assessed through analyses of variance with significance level p < 0.05. One-hundred and twenty pitchers were included. Elbow varus torque was greater in higher competition levels. Shoulder distraction force was greater in higher competition levels. All levels demonstrated similar maximum vertical push off ground reaction force (p = 0.960) and maximum vertical landing ground reaction force (p = 0.135). Higher competition level pitchers demonstrated improved pitching kinematic efficiency compared to lower-level pitchers. However, college and professional pitchers exhibited greater arm stress, which may be attributed to increased pitching velocity. These pitching biomechanical data can be used as normative comparisons when examining pitching mechanics at multiple competition levels throughout an athlete's baseball career. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 31(3):177-180, 2022).

Does sex affect second ACL injury risk? A systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine sex-based differences in risk of a second ACL injury (overall and by laterality) following primary ACL reconstruction in athletes who are attempting to return to sport. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Systematic search of five databases conducted in August 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies reporting sex-based differences in the incidence of second ACL injury in athletes attempting to return-to-sports and who were followed for at least 1 year following primary ACL reconstruction. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included in this review, with seven studies excluded from the primary meta-analysis due to high risk of bias. The remaining 12 studies (n=1431 females, n=1513 males) underwent meta-analysis, with all 19 studies included in a sensitivity analysis. Total second ACL injury risk was 21.9% (females: 22.8%, males: 20.3%). Females were found to have 10.7% risk of an ipsilateral ACL injury and 11.8% risk of a contralateral ACL injury. Males were found to have 12.0% risk of an ipsilateral ACL injury and 8.7% risk of a contralateral ACL injury. No statistically significant differences were observed for total second ACL injury risk (risk difference=-0.6%, 95% CI -4.9 to 3.7, p=0.783, I2=41%) or contralateral ACL injury risk (risk difference=1.9%, 95% CI -0.5% to 4.4%, p=0.113, I2=15%) between sexes. Females were found to have a 3.4% absolute risk reduction in subsequent ipsilateral ACL injury risk compared with males (risk difference=-3.4%, 95% CI -6.7% to -0.02%, p=0.037, I2=35%). CONCLUSION: Both sexes have >20% increased risk of experiencing a second ACL injury. Any difference in the absolute risk of either a subsequent ipsilateral or contralateral ACL injury between sexes appears to be small. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42020148369).