2018
DOI: 10.1249/jsr.0000000000000534
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Incidence, Diagnosis, and Management of Injury in Sport Climbing and Bouldering: A Critical Review

Abstract: The Leeds Beckett repository holds a wide range of publications, each of which has been checked for copyright and the relevant embargo period has been applied by the Research Services team. We operate on a standard take-down policy. If you are the author or publisher of an output and you would like it removed from the repository, please contact us and we will investigate on a case-by-case basis.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
26
1
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
2
26
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The emergence of climbing as a competitive discipline has generated research interest. Studies have mainly examined motivational and risk-taking profiles (e.g., Martha et al, 2009; Jones et al, 2017), physiological aspects (e.g., Espanña-Romero et al, 2012), biomechanical properties (e.g., Vigouroux et al, 2011), and injuries (e.g., Jones et al, 2018). Notwithstanding previous work, researchers frequently discuss that variables of a psychological nature such as problem-solving ability, movement sequence recall, route finding skills, anxiety levels and stress management may be better predictors of optimal physical climbing performance than physiological or biomechanical variables (e.g., Sheel, 2004; Watts, 2004; Giles et al, 2006; MacLeod et al, 2007; Morrison and Schöffl, 2007; Jones and Sanchez, 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The emergence of climbing as a competitive discipline has generated research interest. Studies have mainly examined motivational and risk-taking profiles (e.g., Martha et al, 2009; Jones et al, 2017), physiological aspects (e.g., Espanña-Romero et al, 2012), biomechanical properties (e.g., Vigouroux et al, 2011), and injuries (e.g., Jones et al, 2018). Notwithstanding previous work, researchers frequently discuss that variables of a psychological nature such as problem-solving ability, movement sequence recall, route finding skills, anxiety levels and stress management may be better predictors of optimal physical climbing performance than physiological or biomechanical variables (e.g., Sheel, 2004; Watts, 2004; Giles et al, 2006; MacLeod et al, 2007; Morrison and Schöffl, 2007; Jones and Sanchez, 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Up-to-date knowledge of climbing injuries and climbers’ views on seeking healthcare is needed to ensure that climbers with an injury are assessed properly and given the help needed to recover. However, most of the research on climbing-related injuries combine acute injuries and chronic injuries,9–12 and knowledge of climbers’ beliefs about the value of healthcare is scarce 12. Although most people engaged in sports operate at moderate levels of intensity, most of the research on the use of sports medicine is based on studies assessing team sports and elite-level subjects 13 14…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The incidence of injuries affecting the lower limbs in sport climbing and bouldering has grown steadily in recent years. 23 The change in injury distribution is not known for certain, but increased participation in bouldering may have affected the incidence. 17,23 Bouldering, a derivative of rock climbing, has seen rising participation levels in the past decade.…”
Section: Diagnosismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…23 The change in injury distribution is not known for certain, but increased participation in bouldering may have affected the incidence. 17,23 Bouldering, a derivative of rock climbing, has seen rising participation levels in the past decade. 24 A bouldering problem is a sequence of difficult moves without the use of ropes or gear for protection.…”
Section: Diagnosismentioning
confidence: 99%