4.1 Article

The Beighton Score and injury in Dancers: A Prospective Cohort Study

Journal

JOURNAL OF SPORT REHABILITATION
Volume 29, Issue 5, Pages 563-571

Publisher

HUMAN KINETICS PUBL INC
DOI: 10.1123/jsr.2018-0390

Keywords

joint hypermobility; total days injured; lumbar flexion

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Context: Joint hypermobility has a high prevalence in dancers and may be associated with injury and performance. Objectives: To investigate whether total Beighton score can predict injury and to determine the relationship between joint hypermobility and injury, and to report injury demographics. Design: A prospective cohort injury study. Setting: Edge Hill University dance injury clinic. Participants: Eighty-two dancers (62 females, 20 males). Main Outcome Measures: Joint hypermobility via the Beighton score >= 4 with lumbar flexion included and removed. Results: A total of 61 dancers were classified as hypermobile, which was reduced to 50 dancers with lumbar flexion removed. A significant difference existed between pooled total days injured in hypermobile dancers and nonhypermobile dancers with lumbar flexion included (P = .02) and removed (P= .03). No significant differences existed for total Beighton score between injured and noninjured groups with lumbar flexion included (P= .11) and removed (P = .13). Total Beighton score was a weak predictor of total days injured (r(2) = .06, P = .51). In total, 47 injuries occurred in 34 dancers, and pooled injury rate was 1.03 injuries/1000 hours. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated an area under the curve of 0.83 for male dancers with lumbar flexion removed, which was considered diagnostic for injury. Conclusions: The Beighton score can be utilized to identify dancers who may develop injury. Clinicians should consider the role of lumbar flexion in total Beighton score when identifying those dancers at risk of injury. Different injury thresholds in female and male dancers may aid injury management.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available