<p>Objectives This study examines the incidence of ankle injuries and identifies ankle injury risk among contemporary preprofessional dancers. Methods A total of 91 first-year contemporary preprofessional dancers were prospectively followed during one academic year. Self-reported ankle injuries, assessed with the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Centre questionnaire, were categorised as all complaint ankle injuries, substantial ankle injuries or time-loss ankle injuries. In addition, ankle injuries leading to medical attention were included. Regression analyses were used to determine the association between potential risk factors (dancer characteristics, history of ankle injury in the previous year, ankle range of motion and dorsiflexion) and ankle injuries. Results The 1-year ankle injury incidence proportion was 18.7% (n=17), 8.8% (n=8), 15.4% (n=14) and 7.7% (n=7), respectively, for all complaint ankle injuries, ankle injuries requiring medical attention, time-loss injuries and substantial injuries. Being male (OR=0.27; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.75) and being a student of the Bachelors in Dance and Education (OR=0.27; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.97) were univariately associated with a lower risk of an ankle injury. Conclusion Almost 20% of first-year preprofessional dancers reported an ankle injury, with more than 80% of the dancers reporting that their injury leads to dance time loss. Males and students of the bachelors in dance and education were at lower risk of ankle injuries. As ankle injuries are common among dancers, studies with larger sample sizes, a more heterogeneous population (eg, different dance styles) and longer follow-up periods are necessary to evaluate the impact of ankle injuries in further detail. </p>

doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2021-001060, hdl.handle.net/1765/136398
Urban Planning
Erasmus School of History, Culture and Communication (ESHCC)

Khalil Bachir Aouissi, Said Madani, & V (Vincent) Baptist. (2021). Morphological Evolution of the Port‐City Interface of Algiers (16th Century to the Present). Urban Planning, 6(3), 119–135. doi:10.17645/up.v6i3.4017