|
Citation
|
Goggins L, Williams S, Griffin S, Langley B, Newman D, Peirce N. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2023; ePub(ePub): ePub. |
|
Abstract
|
OBJECTIVES: Explore whether injury profiles and mechanisms differ between red (First-Class multi-day) ball cricket and white (One-Day and Twenty20 limited over) ball cricket in elite men's domestic cricket from 2010 to 2019.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis.
METHODS: Injury incidence calculated according to the updated international consensus statement on injury surveillance in cricket, along with seasonal days lost and injury severity descriptive statistics.
RESULTS: Across both cricket types, bowling resulted in the most seasonal days lost (mean 1942, 95 % confidence interval: 1799-2096) and highest mean injury severity (30 days, 95 % confidence interval: 28-33), with the lumbar spine the body region with the most seasonal days lost (mean 432 seasonal days; 95 % confidence interval: 355-525) from bowling. Injury incidence was higher in white ball compared to red ball cricket (per unit of time), with bowling (and its various phases) the most frequently occurring mechanism in both cricket types (white ball: 67.0 injuries per 1000 days of play [95 % confidence interval: 59.6-75.3]; red ball: 32.4 injuries per 1000 days of play [95 % confidence interval: 29.1-36.1]). When bowling, the abdomen and thigh were the body regions most injured from white (13.4 injuries per 1000 days of play [95 % confidence interval: 10.3-17.4]), and red ball (6.4 injuries per 1000 days of play [95 % confidence interval: 5.0-8.2]) cricket respectively. Overall, clear differences emerged in the nature and mechanism of injuries between red ball cricket and white ball cricket.
CONCLUSIONS: Bowling presents the highest injury risk (across both cricket types), as well as highlighting the increased risk of injuries from diving during fielding and running between the wickets when batting, in shorter white ball cricket.
Language: en |