Validated Tools Used to Assess Musculoskeletal Injuries in Dancers: A Systematic Review.

Abstract

Introduction: Dance is a physically demanding art form that often results in musculoskeletal injuries. To effectively treat these injuries, standardized and reliable assessment tools designed to the dancer's needs are required. Thus, the aim of this review is to identify studies that have employed validated tools to assess musculoskeletal injuries in ballet, modern, and contemporary dancers, focusing on describing the content and psychometric quality of the tools used. Methods: This systematic review is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022306755). PubMed, Cochrane, LILACS, Web of Science and SPORTDiscus databases were searched by two independent reviewers. Articles assessing musculoskeletal injuries with validated tools in ballet, modern and/or contemporary dancers and written in English, Portuguese, or Spanish were included. Non-peer reviewed articles, books, conference abstracts, thesis/review articles, or case design studies were excluded. The original validation studies were compiled when necessary. Two independent reviewers conducted a standardized data extraction and evaluated the methodological quality using an adapted Downs and Black checklist. Results: From the 3933 studies screened, 172 were read to verify if they met the inclusion criteria, resulting in 37 studies included accounting for 16 unique validated tools. Two were imaging exams, one was an injury classification system, and 13 were self-reported injury questionnaires. Only four injury assessment tools were validated for dancers, emphasizing the need for further validation studies for the dance population. Most of the articles (57%) achieved high-quality methodological scores and the remaining (43%) reported medium-quality scores. Conclusions: Valid, reliable, and specific tools to assess dance injuries are lacking in general. For enhanced methodological rigor in future studies, the incorporation of validated tools is recommended to improve methodological quality and facilitate cross-study comparisons. Researchers may consider conducting validation studies, involving processes such as translation into another language, validation of modifications to the original tool, or reporting reliability within the article itself.