A new study, “Epidemiology of Upper Extremity Injuries in NCAA Men’s and Women’s Ice Hockey” published online on July 5, 2018 in The American Journal of Sports Medicine suggests that ice hockey players and those who treat them should be aware of the high propensity for upper extremity injuries in the sport.
Upper Extremity Injuries High in Ice Hockey
1 min read Premium comments
Secondary#icehockey#ncaainjurysurveillanceprogram#upperextremityinjuries
The researchers collected data from the NCAA [National Collegiate Athletic Association] Injury Surveillance Program on all upper extremity injuries players sustained during the academic years 2004-2005 to 2013-2014.
According to the data, the overall rate of upper extremity injuries for men was higher than that for women (236 vs 125 injuries per 100,000 athlete-exposure [AEs]; RR, 1.89; 95% CI< 1.67-2.15) In addition, upper extremity injuries that occurred during either pre- or postseason were approximately 3 times higher for men than for women (preseason: 149 vs 53 per 100,000 AEs; RR, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.69-4.74; postseason: 143 vs 49 per 100,000 AEs; RR, 2.91; 95% CI, 1.33-6.38) during the regular season.
The overall injury rate was highest during the regular season and the most common upper extremity injury reported as acromioclavicular joint sprain (men, 29.1%; women, 13.8%), which accounts for the most non-time loss, moderate time loss (2-13 days) and severe time loss (≥14 days) injuries.
The researchers wrote, “Men and women sustained a significant number of [upper extremity] injuries playing collegiate ice hockey during the period studied, with acromioclavicular joint sprain being the most common [upper extremity] injury and the one that most frequently led to significant time loss.”
They added, “These data may provide insight for future injury prevention and guide improvements in training.”
React:
Discussion
This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?
Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.
We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.
Join the conversation
Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.