↓ Skip to main content

Falls and injuries to Polo players: risk perception, mitigation and risk factors

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine - Open, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Falls and injuries to Polo players: risk perception, mitigation and risk factors
Published in
Sports Medicine - Open, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40798-014-0002-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

C M Inness, K L Morgan

Abstract

Polo, one of the world's oldest sports, is played in over 80 countries. It is unique in combining the skills of a person with the agility and performance of an animal in a contact sport. There is only one report of the frequency and type of injuries in this population. Here we report risk perception, mitigation and risk factors for injuries and falls in UK polo players. Data were collected retrospectively from a random sample of 112 UK polo players by telephone questionnaire. Injuries (commonly to a shoulder or wrist) requiring a hospital visit were sustained by 17.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.1-25.5) of players. Falls (odds ratio [OR] 6.6, 95% CI 1.4-31.9) and higher self-assessed fitness levels increased the risk (OR 1.7, CI 1.2-2.4). Use of wrist supports (OR 0.2, CI 0.03-0.9) and gym exercise (OR 0.1, CI 0.02-0.9) reduced it. Falls were reported by 58% (CI 47.3-68.8) of players. Women were less at risk than men (OR 0.3, CI 0.1-0.9). Aiming for a better handicap increased the risk (OR 8.4, CI 1.2-57.0). Pre-season rider and horse training were also risk factors. Helmets are compulsory, but players reported that safety certification was not their most important criterion for helmet selection; 49.4% (CI 38.5-60.3) chose appearance. Attendance of a doctor at polo games was not considered important by 65.4% (CI 55.1-75.8) of players; attendance of paramedics and ambulances was volunteered as being of greater consequence. The findings of this study suggest that the protective effect of wrist supports needs testing, helmet manufacturers should incorporate both style and safety into their designs, and paramedics and ambulances should attend polo games.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 16%
Student > Master 4 11%
Lecturer 3 8%
Researcher 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 13 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 5 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Psychology 4 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 16 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 November 2020.
All research outputs
#6,443,957
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine - Open
#360
of 595 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,749
of 359,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine - Open
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 595 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 359,955 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.