Pas, Haiko Ivo Maria Franciscus LodewijkPluim, Babette M.Kilic, OzgurVerhagen, EvertGouttebarge, VincentHolman, RebeccaMoen, Maarten H.Kerkhoffs, Gino M.Tol, Johannes L.2023-01-272023-01-272020-09Pas, H.I.M.F.L., Pluim, B.M., Kilic, O. et al. Effectiveness of an e-health tennis-specific injury prevention programme: randomised controlled trial in adult recreational tennis players. British Journal of Sports Medicine 2020; 54: 1036-1041, doi : 10.1136/bjsports-2019-101142.0306-3674 (print)1473-0480 (online)10.1136/bjsports-2019-101142https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/88990BACKGROUND : Despite reported injury rates of up to 3 per 1000 hours exposure, there are no evidence-based prevention programmes in tennis. PURPOSE : To evaluate the effectiveness of an e-health prevention programme for reducing tennis injury prevalence. STUDY DESIGN : Two-arm, researcher-blinded randomised controlled trial. METHODS : Adult tennis players of all playing levels were randomised in an unsupervised programme lasting 12 weeks (TennisReady group or control group). The primary outcome was the overall injury prevalence over a 16-week period, measured at 2 weekly intervals with the Oslo Sports and Trauma Research Centre questionnaire. Estimates for the primary outcome and associated 95% CIs were obtained using generalised estimating equation models. Secondary outcome scores included prevalence of substantial injuries, overall incidence, adherence and time-loss injuries. RESULTS : A total of 579 (83%) (TennisReady n=286, control n=293) participants were included in the primary analysis. The mean injury prevalence was 37% (95% CI 33% to 42%) in the TennisReady vs 38% (95% CI 34% to 42%) in the control group (adjusted p-value 0.93). The prevalence of substantial injuries was 11% (95% CI 9% to 14%) in the TennisReady vs 12% (95% CI 9% to 15%) in the control group (p value of 0.79). Analysis of the secondary outcome scores showed no difference between groups. The mean prevalence rates between high (8%) and low (92%) adherent groups were 32% (95% CI 23% to 44%) and 37% (95% CI 33% to 42%), respectively (p value 0.36). CONCLUSION : Providing an unsupervised e-health tennis-specific exercise programme did not reduce the injury rates and should not be implemented. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER : NTR6443.en© BMJ Publishing Group Limited 2020E-health prevention programmeInjuriesTennisInjury preventionPostprint Article