| Recherche par catégorie |
Injury reporting in dance: summary of the 2006 Research Committee survey and its subsequent recommendations
Liederbach, Marijeanne MSPT, MSATC, CSCS, Harkness Center for Dance Injuries, NYU Hospital for Joint Diseases, New York, New York, United States; Hagins, Marshall PhD, PT, Long Island University Department of Physical Therapy, Brooklyn, New York, United States; and Welsh, Tom PhD Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, United States
Purpose
This session will summarize and invite discussion on the recommendations of the IADMS Research Committee (RC) for standardized injury reporting. In 2004, the RC began a consensus project aimed at encouraging the international dance medicine and science community to adopt uniform testing and reporting methods. By standardizing the documentation, nomenclature and grading of dancer functional capacity, dance environment risk factors and injury occurrence, the consensus project aimed to lay groundwork for successful and cooperative sharing of information. Ultimately, the RC strives for coalesced information to facilitate effective risk reduction strategies in order to enhance the well-being, career longevity and quality of life for dancers.
Participants, Setting, Equipment
To advance the consensus project?s goals, analyses of various field practices were undertaken. In 2006, the RC called upon the community to participate in a 12-item injury reporting survey.
Procedure
Through email blasts and newsletter announcements, injury reporting information was solicited and an analysis of injury reporting practices currently in use in the field was completed.
Results
One hundred seventeen surveys were returned. Healthcare professionals submitted 59% of forms; dance educators 38% of forms and dance company artistic staff members 3% of forms. 53% came from academic settings, such as university dance departments, and 47% came from professional dance company settings. Table 1 (below) shows a list of items surveyed and the percent of total responses given for each query.
Conclusions
This analysis catalogs methods currently used to document injury occurrence in dance. The survey results, evaluated in the context of 30-years worth of sports medicine literature, led the RC to formulate recommendations for uniform reporting methods. These recommendations, along with the methods necessary to carry them out, will be described in detail.
Table 1 ? 2006 Research Committee Injury Reporting Survey Results
|
Item |
Frequency |
|
Do you conduct injury reporting at your facility? |
|
|
Yes |
53% |
|
No |
47% |
|
If yes, is injury reporting at your facility optional or mandatory? |
|
|
Optional |
71% |
|
Mandatory |
29% |
|
To whom do the dancers report their injury? |
|
|
Healthcare Professional |
60% |
|
Dance Teacher, Rehearsal Director or Company Manager |
40% |
|
Who documents the injury? |
|
|
Healthcare Professional |
33% |
|
Injured Dancer |
35% |
|
Dance Teacher or Company Manager |
30% |
|
How do you define injury? |
|
|
By tissue pathology |
67% |
|
By need to seek medical attention |
21% |
|
By time lost from dance |
4% |
|
By need to file a worker?s compensation case |
4% |
|
By dance function lost |
2% |
|
By treatment length |
2% |
|
How does your injury reporting system measure exposure? |
|
|
It does not measure exposure |
72% |
|
By exposure-episode |
16% |
|
By person-hour |
4% |
|
By dancer-day |
4% |
|
By contracted work hours |
4% |