We found that previous RRI was associated with higher risk of RRI in recreational runners. A systematic review on this topic concluded that this variable had strong evidence to be a risk factor of RRI (van Gent et al 2007). Two possible explanations for these findings are: the ‘new’ injury is an exacerbation of an earlier injury that was not completely recovered (Taunton et

al 2003, Wen et al 1998); and injured runners may adopt a different biomechanical pattern in order to protect the injured anatomical region and this could predispose them to a new injury. Duration of training, speed training, and interval training were also associated with higher RRI. Despite statistical significance, the OR of duration of training was very small indicating an irrelevant effect in real life. This means that in our study and in recreational runners generally, other training characteristics can be more important to predict RRI. Speed training selleck products was associated with higher RRI. This can be explained by an increase in the running intensity overloading the musculoskeletal structures, predisposing recreational runners

to injury. The fact that interval training was associated with lower RRI in this study also supports this hypothesis. Most of the recreational runners who perform interval training switch from normal or slightly higher intensity intervals to lower or much lower intensity intervals (eg, walking), resulting in a lower total training intensity in a given running session, decreasing Ibrutinib mw the odds of injury. We consider that the strengths of this study are two-fold. First, we measured some training variables (duration of training session, speed training, interval training, and the level of motivation to run) that were not measured in previous observational prospective studies with recreational runners not enrolled STK38 or training to participate in races. Therefore,

our results add important information about the association between training variables with RRI in recreational runners. Second, we performed a statistical analysis to determine the predictive factors of RRI that take into account the recurrent events and the variation of the time-dependent variables during the study. To our knowledge, no studies with the purpose of identifying predictive factors of RRI have used this longitudinal statistical technique. There are some limitations to this study. First, the recreational runners who participated in this study were recruited from the same database, which may limit the generalisability of our results. Second, self-report injuries were used in the study. The logistics of this study did not allow for confirmation of diagnosis by a health professional. Therefore, to facilitate injury reporting participants were required to select options from drop-down boxes with the additional option of entering a response to an empty box if there was no suitable option in the drop-down boxes.