We have located links that may give you full text access.
High acute:chronic workloads are associated with injury in England & Wales Cricket Board Development Programme fast bowlers.
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 2018 January
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to explore the relationship between acute (1 week) and chronic (4-week average) bowling workloads and injury risk in National Development Programme fast bowlers, and to investigate individual differences in the relationship between acute:chronic workloads and injury.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
METHODS: Bowling workloads and injury data were collected prospectively for 29 male fast bowlers (age range 15-18) on a National Programme over two years. Workload variables were calculated and the likelihood of injury and individual effects were explored using a generalised linear mixed effects model and magnitude-based inferences.
RESULTS: Acute:chronic workloads of 109-142% (relative risk [RR]: 1.46, 90% CI: 0.93-2.29; likely harmful), and ≥142% (RR: 1.66, 90% CI: 1.06-2.59, likely harmful) were associated with a substantial increase in injury risk compared with the reference quartile (<87%). A high chronic workload (>83 balls) substantially attenuated the influence of a high (>108%) acute:chronic workload ratio on injury risk (RR: 0.35, 90% CI: 0.17-0.74). Significant individual differences in the acute:chronic workload-injury relationship were evident.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides further evidence of the association between 'spikes' in workload and injury risk, but also demonstrates that this relationship is individual-specific and dependent on the level of chronic workload. Support teams for fast bowlers should monitor bowling workloads to avoid rapid fluctuations but should also base decisions on individualised data.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
METHODS: Bowling workloads and injury data were collected prospectively for 29 male fast bowlers (age range 15-18) on a National Programme over two years. Workload variables were calculated and the likelihood of injury and individual effects were explored using a generalised linear mixed effects model and magnitude-based inferences.
RESULTS: Acute:chronic workloads of 109-142% (relative risk [RR]: 1.46, 90% CI: 0.93-2.29; likely harmful), and ≥142% (RR: 1.66, 90% CI: 1.06-2.59, likely harmful) were associated with a substantial increase in injury risk compared with the reference quartile (<87%). A high chronic workload (>83 balls) substantially attenuated the influence of a high (>108%) acute:chronic workload ratio on injury risk (RR: 0.35, 90% CI: 0.17-0.74). Significant individual differences in the acute:chronic workload-injury relationship were evident.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides further evidence of the association between 'spikes' in workload and injury risk, but also demonstrates that this relationship is individual-specific and dependent on the level of chronic workload. Support teams for fast bowlers should monitor bowling workloads to avoid rapid fluctuations but should also base decisions on individualised data.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app