Validated Tools Used to Assess Musculoskeletal Injuries in Dancers: A Systematic Review

Author:

Panosso Isabela1ORCID,Senger Danrlei1ORCID,Delabary Marcela dos Santos1,Angioi Manuela2,Haas Aline Nogueira13ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil

2. Queen Mary University of London, London, UK

3. Global Brain Health Institute, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

Abstract

Introduction: Dance is a physically demanding art form that often results in musculoskeletal injuries. To effectively treat these injuries, standardized and reliable assessment tools designed to the dancer’s needs are required. Thus, the aim of this review is to identify studies that have employed validated tools to assess musculoskeletal injuries in ballet, modern, and contemporary dancers, focusing on describing the content and psychometric quality of the tools used. Methods: This systematic review is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022306755). PubMed, Cochrane, LILACS, Web of Science and SPORTDiscus databases were searched by two independent reviewers. Articles assessing musculoskeletal injuries with validated tools in ballet, modern and/or contemporary dancers and written in English, Portuguese, or Spanish were included. Non-peer reviewed articles, books, conference abstracts, thesis/review articles, or case design studies were excluded. The original validation studies were compiled when necessary. Two independent reviewers conducted a standardized data extraction and evaluated the methodological quality using an adapted Downs and Black checklist. Results: From the 3933 studies screened, 172 were read to verify if they met the inclusion criteria, resulting in 37 studies included accounting for 16 unique validated tools. Two were imaging exams, one was an injury classification system, and 13 were self-reported injury questionnaires. Only four injury assessment tools were validated for dancers, emphasizing the need for further validation studies for the dance population. Most of the articles (57%) achieved high-quality methodological scores and the remaining (43%) reported medium-quality scores. Conclusions: Valid, reliable, and specific tools to assess dance injuries are lacking in general. For enhanced methodological rigor in future studies, the incorporation of validated tools is recommended to improve methodological quality and facilitate cross-study comparisons. Researchers may consider conducting validation studies, involving processes such as translation into another language, validation of modifications to the original tool, or reporting reliability within the article itself.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3