Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Prevalence and risk factors for Achilles tendon rupture in the military population from 2006 to 2015: a retrospective cohort study
  1. John J Fraser1,2,
  2. J A Zellers3,4,
  3. C K Sullivan5 and
  4. C F Janney5
  1. 1Operational Readiness and Health Directorate, Naval Health Research Center, San Diego, California, USA
  2. 2Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences F Edward Hebert School of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
  3. 3Program in Physical Therapy, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA
  4. 4Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA
  5. 5Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr John J Fraser; jjf5ac{at}virginia.edu

Abstract

Introduction Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) is a serious musculoskeletal injury that results in substantial functional decline, especially in highly physically demanding occupations such as service in the military. The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the prevalence and associated factors of ATR in US military service members.

Methods The Defence Medical Epidemiology Database was used to identify all diagnosed ATR in military personnel from 2006 to 2015. The prevalence of ATR was calculated and compared by year, service branch and military rank. Unadjusted and adjusted assessments of risk were calculated.

Results Officers incurred 15 978 episodes at a prevalence of 7.43/1000 (male: 8.11/1000; female: 3.89/1000). Among enlisted personnel, there were 59 242 episodes of ATR that occurred at a prevalence of 6.23 episodes per 1000 (male enlisted: 6.49/1000; female enlisted: 4.48/1000). Apart from enlisted aviation specialists (where there was no significant difference in risk between men and women), both female officers and enlisted service members had significantly lower risk of ATR compared with their male counterparts in all occupations (prevalence ratio (PR): 0.26–0.73). Aviation and service officers demonstrated significantly lower risk of ATR episodes (PR: 0.87–0.91) and administration, operations, intelligence and logistic officers demonstrated increased risk (PR: 1.16–1.31) compared with ground and naval gunfire officers. Among enlisted specialties, all but mechanised/armour and combat engineers had significantly higher risk of ATR risk compared with infantry (PR: 1.14–2.13), with the highest risk observed in the administration, intelligence and communication fields.

Conclusions ATR was ubiquitous in the US military, with multiple risk factors identified, including male sex, older age, rank, military occupation and service branch. These findings highlight the populations that can most greatly benefit from preventive screening and care.

  • SPORTS MEDICINE
  • Foot & ankle
  • Musculoskeletal disorders
  • OCCUPATIONAL & INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE
  • PUBLIC HEALTH

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • X @NavyPT

  • Contributors JJF contributed to the conception, study design, data acquisition and analysis. JJF, JAZ and CKS contributed to the drafting of this manuscript. All authors (JJF, JAZ, CKS and CFJ) contributed to data interpretation, critical revision and final approval of the study. JJF is the guarantor.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • .Disclaimer We affirm that we have no financial affiliation (including research funding) or involvement with any commercial organisation that has a direct financial interest in any matter included in this manuscript, except as disclosed and cited in the manuscript. Any other conflict of interest (ie, personal associations or involvement as a director, officer or expert witness) is also disclosed and cited in the manuscript

  • Competing interests JJF reports grants from Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programmes and the Office of Naval Research outside of the submitted work. In addition, JJF has a patent pending for an Adaptive and Variable Stiffness Ankle Brace, US Provisional Patent Application No. 63254,474. JJF, CKS and CFJ are military service members or employees of the US Government. This work was prepared as part of their official duties. Title 17, U.S.C. §105 provides that copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the US Government. Title 17, U.S.C. §101 defines a US government work as work prepared by a military service member or employee of the US government as part of that person’s official duties. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs, or the US government. The study protocol was approved by the Naval Health Research Centre Institutional Review Board in compliance with all applicable federal regulations governing the protection of human subjects.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.