A qualitative research study on injury, injury prevention and implementation of preventive measures in Olympic Athletes

PROJECT PARTNERS

  • The Australian Centre for Research into Injury in Sport and its Prevention (Edith Cowan University and La Trobe University Sport and Exercise Medicine Research Centre, Australia)

  • Sport Injury Prevention Research Centre (University of Calgary, Canada)

  • Institute of Sports Medicine & Sports Orthopedic Research Center-Copenhagen (SORC-C) (Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark)

  • French-speaking Research Network for Athlete Health Protection & Performance (French Institute of Sport; University and University Hospital of Liège; Luxembourg Institute of Research in Orthopedics, Sports Medicine and Science; National Sport Institute of Quebec; Geneva University Hospitals)

  • Yonsei Institute of Sports Science and Exercise Medicine (Yonsei University, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Korean Sports and Olympic, Sol Hospital, Korea National Sport University, Republic of Korea)

  • Aspetar Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Hospital (Qatar)

  • Sport, Exercise Medicine and Lifestyle Institute (University of Pretoria, University of Stellenbosch, South African Medical Research Council, South Africa)

  • London’s Institute for Sports, Exercise and Health and National Centre for Sports Exercise and Medicine (United Kingdom)

  • United States Coalition for the Prevention of Illness and Injury in Sport (United States Olympic Committee, Steadman Philippon Research Institute, The University of Utah, USA)

FUNDING

  • None

BACKGROUND

It has been argued that, for better and more effective ‘real-world’ injury prevention and athlete health protection, a broader research focus is needed – moving from the isolated problem and the underlying factors, towards the athlete as a whole. As such, there is a need to take into account the demands, wishes, needs, possibilities, and motivations of the athlete and other stakeholders. For this purpose, a large-scale qualitative study was initiated in the Netherlands to explore the narrative of athletes, and their respective coaches and medical staff (stakeholders), in regard to injury and illness definitions, perceived causal factors, and preventive practices. This study has elicited varying definitions of injury, the breadth of perceived risk factors, and – most importantly – the complex system around the elite athletes.

Although vital for future directions in intervention translation, these results and insights remain restricted to a specific local non-Olympic context. Given the fact that across countries support and development by Olympic programs differs (i.e. budget, sports culture, support, talent development, etc.) these initial local findings beg the question how differences between national Olympic programs affect athlete and stakeholder perceptions, and to what extent evidence and interventions require tailoring across countries and international Olympic settings. For this reason, we now extend the Dutch study to an international setting, including Olympic athletes, coaches and medical staff from the United Kingdom, South Africa, Canada, South Korea, Australia, France / Belgium, Qatar, and Denmark.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of the proposed project is to explore the narrative of Olympic athletes, coaches, and health care providers in relation to their perceptions of injury and illness prevention. Based on this narrative, this project aims to explore and understand the practicalities of sports related injury and illness prevention based on beliefs, attitudes and knowledge from key stakeholders in different countries:

Specific research questions to be answered across elite athletic cultures are:

(1) How do Olympic athletes and stakeholders define injury and illness, and are there differences in definitions between stakeholders?

(2) Which factors and mechanisms are related to risk of injury and illness from the Olympic athletes’ and stakeholders’ perspective?

(3) How do Olympic athletes and stakeholders deal with health problems and their prevention in everyday practice?

(4) Which contextual factors influence actual preventive behavior, and do these factors differ between Olympic programs, sports and stakeholders?