Comparison of subsequent injury categorisation (SIC) models and their application in a sporting population

BackgroundThe original subsequent injury categorisation (SIC-1.0) model aimed to classify relationships between chronological injury sequences to provide insight into the complexity and causation of subsequent injury occurrence. An updated model has recently been published. Comparison of the data coded according to the original and revised subsequent injury categorisation (SIC-1.0 and SIC-2.0) models has yet been formally compared.MethodsMedical attention injury data was prospectively collected for 42 elite water polo players over an 8month surveillance period. The SIC-1.0 and SIC-2.0 models were retrospectively applied to the injury data. The injury categorisation from the two models was compared using descriptive statistics.ResultsSeventy-four injuries were sustained by the 42 players (median=2, range=0-5), of which 32 injuries (43.2%) occurred subsequent to a previous injury. The majority of subsequent injuries were coded as occurring at a different site and being of a different nature, while also being considered clinically unrelated to the previous injury (SIC-1.0 category 10=57.9%; SIC-2.0 clinical category 16=54.4%). Application of the SIC-2.0 model resulted in a greater distribution of category allocation compared to the SIC-1.0 model that reflects a greater precision in the SIC-2.0 model.ConclusionsSubsequent injury categorisation of sport injury data can be undertaken using either the original (SIC-1.0) or the revised (SIC-2.0) model to obtain similar results. However, the SIC-2.0 model offers the ability to identify a larger number of mutually exclusive categories, while not relying on clinical adjudication for category allocation. The increased precision of SIC-2.0 is advantageous for clinical application and consideration of injury relationships.