Epidemiologic comparisons of soccer-related injuries presenting to emergency departments and reported within high school and collegiate settings
methods: Data sources included: (1) the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) for 14-22 year olds’ soccer-related injury ED data from 2005-2013, (2) High School Reporting Information Online (HS-RIO) for high school soccer injuries during the 2005/06-2013/14 academic years, and (3) the National Collegiate Athletic Association Injury Surveillance Program (NCAA-ISP) for collegiate soccer injuries during the 2009/10-2013/14 academic years. All three datasets include weights to calculate national estimates. We compared nationally estimated proportions of diagnoses with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between (1) HS-RIO and those aged 14-17 years in NEISS in 2005-2013, and (2) NCAA-ISP and those aged 18-22 years in NEISS in 2009-2013. Lack of CI overlap suggested significance.
results: NEISS, HS-RIO, and NCAA-ISP reported annual national estimates of 168503, 375688, and 28547 soccer-related injuries, respectively. Larger proportions of sprains/strains were reported in HS-RIO (48.3%, 95%CI=46.6-49.9%; IPR=1.38) and NCAA-ISP (54.8%, 95%CI=52.2-57.4%; IPR=1.48) than in NEISS (35.1%, 95%CI=33.0-37.1%, and 37.0%, 95%CI=34.9-39.2%, respectively). Smaller proportions of fractures were reported in HS-RIO (7.5%, 95%CI=6.7-8.4%; IPR=0.43) and NCAA-ISP (5.0%, 95%CI=3.9-6.1%; IPR=0.32) than in NEISS (17.7%, 95%CI=16.3-19.1%, and 15.7%, 95%CI=14.1-17.3%, respectively).
conclusions: ATs more commonly reported injuries that are easily diagnosed and treated (e.g., sprains/strains); EDs more commonly reported injuries with longer recovery times and rehabilitation (e.g., fractures). High school and college sports surveillance may better describe the epidemiology of sports-related injury than ED data.
Describe the types of injuries presenting to emergency departments and athletic trainers in high school and college sports settings Identify the differences in injury distributions among varying injury surveillance systems Discuss the importance and limitations of injury surveillance systems such as NEISS, HS-RIO, and NCAA-ISP
Keyword(s): Surveillance, Youth
Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I have worked in the field of sports injury epidemiology since 2009, receiving my PhD in epidemiology in 2014. I have published over 30 research articles related to sports injury. I currently serve as the Director of the NCAA Injury Surveillance Program.
Any relevant financial relationships? No
I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.