Risk profiles in two different alpine rock climbing styles

Author:

Gabl Markus1,Kaiser Peter2,Benedikt Stefan1,Schmidle Gernot1,Haselbacher Matthias1,Arora Rohit1

Affiliation:

1. Medical University of Innsbruck: Medizinische Universitat Innsbruck, Innsbruck, AUSTRIA

2. Orthopädie und Traumatologie, Medical University of Innsbruck: Medizinische Universitat Innsbruck, Innsbruck, AUSTRIA

Abstract

Abstract Introduction The aim of this study is to evaluate the injury risk profile of the two different styles of rock climbing, alpine climbing with minor route protection (AC) and alpine sport climbing on well-protected routes (SC), in order to develop preventive strategies for risk management.  Patients and Methods 18 SC and 12 AC rock climbing accidents were evaluated retrospectively with a focus on climbers` demographics (age, experience, training intensity, performance level), accident demographics (unforeseen events preceding the injury, ascending or descending, fall height), injury patterns (injury severity, pathologies, pathomechanism) and environmental conditions (rock characteristics, route frequency, route grade, weather).  Results Injuries were mainly sustained by male lead climbers during ascent (80%). The lower extremity was injured in 46%, the upper extremity in 40%, the pelvis in 6% and the head, chest and spine in 3%. Climbers were significantly older (43 vs. 31 years; p=0.03) and more experienced (21.5 vs. 5.7 climbing years) in AC. Falling height was significantly greater in AC (14.8 vs. 4.7m). Unforeseen events preceding the injury differed significantly between both groups. Slipping off and letting go preceded the fall in 78% in SC, while rock dislodging occurred only in AC. There was a tendency that climbers in SC climbed near or above their performance level, while climbers in AC climbed below their level. SC climbers tended to show more ankle fractures while AC climbers tended to present more cases with multiple injuries. Discussion AC and SC climbers differ in their risk profiles. Poorer route protection in AC resulted in more severe injuries. Yet in SC routes, good protection alone was not enough to avoid severe injuries. For prevention, climbers should be aware of the specific risks in AC and SC routes and should adjust their behaviour accordingly. Athletic skills were overestimated in SC, while alpine demands were underestimated in AC. A higher focus on visual and haptic grip control may help to prevent loss of hold. A careful lining of the rope into solid rock can reduce rockfalls for the seconder. Continuous attention is mandatory in rope handling and belaying. Applying more mobile pros is recommended in AC because they may shorten fall heights.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3