The results indicate a higher rate of overuse injuries in low back/pelvic region and shoulders than in comparable studies.

Many handball studies have reported injuries that cause absence from participation. In this prospective cohort study on elite Icelandic male players, the aim was to examine the prevalence of overuse problems in low back, knee, and shoulder. Sixteen Icelandic teams were invited. Thirteen teams agreed to participate. The OSTRC overuse questionnaire was distributed every second week during 32‐week period. In addition, the 9+ Screening Test was performed on 130 players. In total, 229 players participated with a weekly average response rate of 72%. The average weekly prevalence for shoulder was 28% (95% CI 25% to 31%), for knee 33% (95% CI 30% to 36%), and for low back 32% (95% CI 29% to 35%). Substantial problems were 10% (95% CI 9% to 11%) in shoulder and knee and 11% (95%CI 10% to 12%) in low back. Only 1% (95% CI 1% to 2%) of the overuse problems caused time loss from participation. In total, 61% of the players played with at least one overuse problem and 25% with one affecting their performance. There was no association between the 9+ Screening Test score and overuse problems among Icelandic male handball players.

Objectives:To test 9+ screening batterie's intra-rater reliability, to provide indicative data of elite handball players, and to analyze difference between age, playing positions and level of play. Design: Descriptive studySetting: Icelandic elite male handball players Participants: 182 elite male handball players. Main Outcome Measures: Nine+ screening battery.Results: Reliability test: Intra-class correlation for the total score was 0.95. The correlation of each of the test factors varied from 0.63 to 0.91. The mean total score was 22.3±2.9 (95%CI 16.7-28.1), with no difference in total score comparing players age or level of play. Goalkeepers displayed a higher total score than other players (F3,151=5.75, p=0.001). Junior players had a lower score than senior players in tests measuring abdominal strength and core stability; Test 5;  2 (3, 182)=41.5, p<0.0001, Test 6;  2 (3, 182)=55.7, p<0.0001, Test 7;  2 (3, 182)=11.8, p<0.005, but higher scores in tests measuring trunk and shoulder mobility Test 8;  2 (3, 182)=18.2, p<0.0001, Test 9;  2 (3, 182)=22.2, p=0.006. Conclusions:The 9+ intra-rater reliability was acceptable for the total score and individual tests. Age-related differences were provided in many individual tests.