Dette er siste tekst-versjon av artikkelen, og den kan inneholde små forskjeller fra forlagets pdf-versjon. Forlagets pdf-versjon finner du på bjsm.bmj.com: http://dx.doi. org/10.1136/bjsports-2014-094538 This is the final text version of the article, and it may contain minor differences from the journal's pdf version. The original publication is available at bjsm.bmj.com: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2014-094538 Sports injuries and illnesses in the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games

Background. Describing the frequency, severity, and causes of sports injuries and illnesses reliably is important for quantifying the risk to athletes and providing direction for prevention initiatives. Methods. Time-loss and/or medical-attention definitions have long been used in sports injury/illness epidemiology research, but the limitations to these definitions mean that some events are incorrectly classified or omitted completely, where athletes continue to train and compete at high levels but experience restrictions in their performance. Introducing a graded definition of performance-restriction may provide a solution to this issue. Results. Results from the Great Britain injury/illness performance project (IIPP) are presented using a performance-restriction adaptation of the accepted surveillance consensus methodologies. The IIPP involved 322 Olympic athletes (males: 172; female: 150) from 10 Great Britain Olympic sports between September 2009 and August 2012. Of all injuries (n = 565), 216 were classified as causing time-loss, 346 as causing performance-restriction, and 3 were unclassified. For athlete illnesses (n = 378), the majority (P < 0.01) resulted in time-loss (270) compared with performance-restriction (101) (7 unclassified). Conclusions. Successful implementation of prevention strategies relies on the correct characterisation of injury/illness risk factors. Including a performance-restriction classification could provide a deeper understanding of injuries/illnesses and better informed prevention initiatives.

Engebretsen, L. (2013). The London 2012 Summer Olympic Games: An analysis of usage of the Olympic Village 'Polyclinic' by competing athletes. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 47,[415][416][417][418][419] Dette er siste tekst-versjon av artikkelen, og den kan inneholde små forskjeller fra forlagets pdf-versjon. Forlagets pdf-versjon finner du på bjsm.bmj.com: http://dx.doi. org/10.1136/bjsports-2013-092325 This is the final text version of the article, and it may contain minor differences from the journal's pdf version. Results: There were a total of 3,220 encounters within the Polyclinic. This figure combines medical consultations, radiology / pathology investigations and prescriptions dispensed. Of these 3,220 encounters there were 2,105 medical consultations; musculoskeletal comprised the greatest number (52%), followed by dental (30%) and ophthalmic (9%). The most frequently used imaging modality was magnetic resonance imaging and diagnostic computer tomography was used the least. After correction for multiple entries, Africa provided the largest proportion of athletes attending the Polyclinic (44%) and Europe the least (9%). Peak usage of all facilities was seen around days 9-10 of competition reflecting the busiest time of competition and largest number of athletes in the Village.Conclusions: The Polyclinic managed a wide variety of both sports-related and non sports-related injuries and illnesses. The breadth of specialists available for consultation was appropriate as was the ease of access to them. The radiology department was able to satisfy demand, as were the pharmacy and pathology services. We would recommend a similar structure of facilities and available expertise in one clinic when planning future mass participation sporting events.

BackgroundRelatively little is known about the risk factors associated with osteoarthritis (OA) in Olympic athletes. As the first step towards prevention, knowledge of preventative/modifiable risk factors are needed.ObjectiveTo examine injury patterns, prevalence, and risk factors for OA in Great Britain's Olympians, aged 40 years and older.DesignCross-sectional study design, with an internal nested-case control.SettingAthletes who had represented Great Britain at the Summer and/or Winter Olympic Games from 1932 to 2012.ParticipantsGreat Britain's Olympians were invited to complete and return a web-based or paper questionnaire. The response rate was 32%, with 605 returns achieved (40–97 years), between the 22nd May 2014 and the 31st January 2015.Assessment of Risk FactorsPotential risk factors for OA included age, body mass index, gender, previous injury, lower limb mal-alignment, hypermobility (self-reported Beighton>4/9), comorbidities, index ring finger ratio, Heberden's and Bouchard's nodes, and having competed in either impact or weight-bearing loading sports.Main Outcome MeasurementsThe primary outcome measure was self-reported physician-diagnosed OA, whereby Great Britain's Olympians confirmed that a physician had previously diagnosed them with the condition. The most severe limb was selected as the index joint for data analysis, if bilateral.ResultsKnee (14%), hip (11%), and the lumbar spine (5%) are most likely affected by OA. Injury appeared the strongest modifiable risk factor for knee [aOR 4.89; 95% CI, 2.64–9.06] and hip OA [aOR 10.46; 95% CI, 3.67–29.83]. Hypermobility appeared a risk factor for knee OA only [aOR 2.26; 95% CI, 1.08–4.74]. Intra-articular injuries through participation in weight-bearing loading sports were consistently reported in those with peripheral joint OA.ConclusionsAs one of the few modifiable risk factors, joint injury prevention should be part of the future initiatives to reduce the risk of OA.