Measuring joint range of motion is an important skill for many allied health professionals. While the Universal Goniometer is the most commonly utilised clinical tool for measuring joint range of motion, the evolution of smartphone technology and applications (apps) provides the clinician with more measurement options. However, the reliability and validity of these smartphones and apps is still somewhat uncertain. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature regarding the intra- and inter-rater reliability and validity of smartphones and apps to measure joint range of motion. Eligible studies were published in English peer-reviewed journals with full text available, involving the assessment of reliability and/or validity of a non-videographic smartphone app to measure joint range of motion in participants >18 years old. An electronic search using PubMed, Medline via Ovid, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SPORTSDiscus was performed. The risk of bias was assessed using a standardised appraisal tool. Twenty-three of the eligible 25 studies exceeded the minimum 60% score to be classified as a low risk of bias, although 3 of the 13 criteria were not achieved in >50% of the studies. Most of the studies demonstrated adequate intra-rater or inter-rater reliability and/or validity for >50% of the range of motion tests across all joints assessed. However, this level of evidence appeared weaker for absolute (e.g. mean difference ± limit of agreement, minimal detectable change) than relative (e.g. intraclass correlation, correlation) measures; and for spinal rotation than spinal extension, flexion and lateral flexion. Our results provide clinicians with sufficient evidence to support the use of smartphones and apps in place of goniometers to measure joint motion. Future research should address some methodological limitations of the literature, especially including the inclusion of absolute and not just relative reliability and validity statistics.

Background:Stand-up paddle boarding (SUP) is a recreational activity and sport that has grown exponentially, with participation increasing from 1.1 million in 2010 to 2.8 million in 2014 in the United States alone. Despite this growth in participation, SUP remains underresearched with regard to injury epidemiology.Purpose:To investigate injury epidemiology (severity, location, type, mechanism) in SUP.Study Design:Descriptive epidemiology study.Methods:An open-source online survey was administered to active SUP participants internationally. The survey captured information relevant to demographics, participation, and injury history over the past 12 months.Results:Of 240 participants included in the data analysis, 67.1% were males, and 54.6% were involved in competition. Participants spent a mean 192.6 ± 179.5 hours participating in SUP per year, most commonly for fun and fitness (43.3%) at the beach or bay (63.0%). A total of 95 participants had sustained at least 1 injury. A total of 161 injuries were recorded, resulting in an injury rate of 3.63 (95% CI, 3.04-4.16) per 1000 hours of SUP. The shoulder/upper arm was the most frequently injured body location, accounting for 32.9% of all injuries, followed by the lower back (14.3%) and the elbow/forearm (11.8%). The most common injury types were to muscle/tendon (50.4%), joint/ligament (22.6%), and skin (14.2%). Endurance paddling was the most frequently reported mechanism of injury (34.5%), followed by contact with a paddler’s own board (20.1%) and sprint paddling (9.3%). Key risk factors for sustaining an injury were age >46 years, competitive status, and participating for >4.8 hours/week, as well as using SUP for racing.Conclusion:This is the first study to report injury epidemiology for SUP. It is evident that both sexes participate in SUP for fun, fitness, and competition. With regard to injuries, the shoulder, lower back, and elbow are the most injury prone; older age, competitive status, and longer hours of participation all influenced the chance of injury. Findings from this study provide the foundation for injury prevention strategies.

Purpose: Low injury rates have previously been correlated with sporting team success, highlighting the importance of injury prevention programs. Recent methods, such as acute: chronic workload ratios (ACWR) have been developed in an attempt to predict and manage injury risk; however, the relation between these methods and injury risk is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and synthesize the key findings of studies that have investigated the relationship between ACWR and injury risk. Methods: Included studies were critically appraised using the Downs and Black checklist, and a level of evidence was determined. Relevant data were extracted, tabulated, and synthesized. Results: Twenty-seven studies were included for review and ranged in percentage quality scores from 48.2% to 64.3%. Almost perfect interrater agreement (κ = 0.885) existed between raters. This review found a high variability between studies with different variables studied (total distance versus high speed running), as well as differences between ratios analyzed (1.50-1.80 versus ≥1.50), and reference groups (a reference group of 0.80-1.20 versus ≤0.85). Conclusion: Considering the high variability, it appears that utilizing ACWR for external (eg, total distance) and internal (eg, heart rate) loads may be related to injury risk. Calculating ACWR using exponentially weighted moving averages may potentially result in a more sensitive measure. There also appears to be a trend towards the ratios of 0.80-1.30 demonstrating the lowest risk of injury. However, there may be issues with the ACWR method that must be addressed before it is confidently used to mitigate injury risk. Utilizing standardized approaches will allow for more objective conclusions to be drawn across multiple populations.

Firefighters, along with other tactical personnel, are at a high risk of work-related physical injury above that of the private sector. The aim of this critical narrative review was to identify, critically appraise and synthesise key findings from recent literature investigating firefighting musculoskeletal injuries to inform injury reduction programs. The methodological approach (search terms, databases, etc.) was registered with PROSPERO and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Study quality was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist with scores graded according to the Kennelly grading system. Levels of evidence were ranked according to the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. Of the 8231 studies identified, 17 met the criteria for inclusion. The methodological quality of the studies was ‘fair’ with a level of evidence of III-2. Reported injury rates ranged from 9% to 74% with the lower extremities and back the leading aggregated bodily sites of injury. Sprains and strains were the leading nature of musculoskeletal injury, often caused by slips, trips and falls, although muscle bending, lifting and squatting or muscle stressing were also prevalent. This review may inform injury reduction strategies and given that injuries reported in firefighters are similar to those of other tactical populations, safety processes to mitigate injuries may be of benefit across the tactical spectrum.

18Surfing consists of both high and low intensity paddling of varying durations, utilizing both 19 the aerobic and anaerobic systems. Surf specific physiological studies lack adequate group 20 sample sizes and VO2peak values are yet to determine differences between competitive and 21 recreational surfers. The purpose of this study was therefore to provide a comprehensive