Abstracts / Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 12 (2010) e1e232
developed to help with auditing their sport injury prevention
programmes.
doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2009.10.113
113
Extending the reach of SportSmart: A survey of ACC
claimants engaged in organised and non-organised sport-
ing and recreational activity
B. McNoe , M. Purnell, D. Chalmers
Prevention Research Unit, University Of Otago
Introduction: New Zealands Accident Compensation
Corporations (ACC) have traditionally targeted organised
sports and recreational activity. SportSmart is a generic injury
prevention programme aimed at organised sport. Individ-
ual programmes based on this model have been developed
for a number of high risk, high cost sports and recre-
ational activities, in association with the relevant national
sporting organisations (NSOs). ACCs injury prevention
messages and programmes are delivered to this audience
primarily through coaches and direct contact with partic-
ipants. However, not all sport and recreational activity is
carried out under the auspices of an NSO. Delivering injury
prevention messages and programmes to participants in
non-organised, informal or social sporting and recre-
ational activity is a challenge. Many of these participants
cannot be reached by means of ACCs traditional injury
prevention delivery agents (e.g. coaches). One of the main
barriers to extending the reach of injury prevention mes-
sages, to include these participants, is a lack of knowledge
about the demographic and behavioural characteristics of this
group.
Methods: Data is currently being collected by a telephone
survey of 2000 ACC claimants aged 16 years of age and older,
making new entitlement claims for two team sports (football
and netball) and two individual recreational activities (eques-
trian and cycling). The interview period will be 12 months
to allow for seasonal variation. The nominated sports and
recreational activities were determined through consultation
with ACC and examination of claim statistics. Considera-
tion was given to sports targeted by ACC, the preferences of
ACC, the annual number of claimants and the estimated sam-
ple sizes required to achieve acceptable levels of statistical
precision.
Results/Conclusions: To date approximately 1500 inter-
views have been completed with a response rate of 81%.
Preliminary results indicate that injuries occurring in social
or non-organised setting contribute a sizeable propor-
tion of the overall injury burden in sport and recreation
and the proportion varies considerably by sporting disci-
pline. Seasonal variation is an important component in the
determination of organised/non organised activity. For this
reason, the final data has not been presented here but will
e55
be analysed when data collection is completed in June
2009.
doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2009.10.114
114
Expert opinion on principles and performance indicators
for safety management systems in community sporting
organisations
A. Donaldson 1, , C. Finch 1 , M. Middleton 2 , D. Borys 1
1 University of Ballarat
2 Sport and Recreation Victoria
Introduction: Community sporting organisations (CSO)
constantly make risk management decisions but few adopt
a systematic approach when doing so. Safety management
systems (SMS) are central to occupational health and safety
(OH&S) yet they have received little sports injury prevention
attention. This project sought and coalesced expert opinion
about key principles and related performance indicators for
SMS in CSOs.
Methods: A three-round online Delphi consultation was
used with sports injury prevention (n = 12), OH&S manage-
ment system (n = 8), and community sports administration
(n = 9) experts. Experts commented on and suggested
changes inclusions and exclusions to an initial set of 5 prin-
ciples (Commitment and policy; Planning; Implementation;
Measurement and evaluation; and Review and improvement)
and 47 indicators (based on the Australian Standard AS/NZS
4801:2001) (Round 1). The experts then rated each revised
indicator on a 5-point scale-from not at all important to
essential - according to how important it was as a reflec-
tion of the related SMS principle in CSOs (Round 2). They
also commented on why they gave an indicator a particular
rating. The experts received a summary of Round 2 responses
and again rated indicator importance (Round 3). They also
rated the feasibility of CSOs being able to satisfactorily meet
each indicator on a 4-point scale from very difficult to very
easy.
Results: The qualitative feedback from the 27 experts in
Round 1 indicated that the five initially identified principles
reflected the core requirements of SMS in CSOs. The initial
set of 47 indicators was modified and expanded to 64 based
on Round 1 responses. In Round 2, >75% of the 24 experts
gave 35 of the 64 indicators a rating of very important
or essential. In Round 3, having reflected on the Round 2
results, >75% of the 21 experts gave 57 indicators a rating of
very important or essential. In round 3, >50% of experts
rated 34 of the 64 indicators as relatively difficult or very
difficult for CSOs to meet.
Conclusions: Experts in this Delphi consultation agreed
that the SMS principles used in OH&S are also relevant
to CSOs. They also agreed that most of the SMS indica-
tors developed in this study are at least very important but
e56 Abstracts / Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 12 (2010) e1e232
CSOs would have some difficulty meeting these require-
ments. Other important feedback included keep it simple
and limit the paperwork. The SMS in CSO principles and
indicators will now be used to develop a framework to enable
benchmarking of current practice.
doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2009.10.115
KEYNOTE
115
Pain. Do you get it?
Queensland Government supported speaker
G.L. Moseley
Prince of Wales Medical Research Institute & University of
New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
The idea that pain is all in your head is at once repulsive
and seductive, depending on your conceptual model of pain.
It is repulsive if it implies that your pain is in some way bogus,
fake or willingly created. It is seductive if it implies that your
brain, which obviously resides in your head, constructs all of
our conscious experiences and pain is no exception. I sit on
the fence a little here: for pain to be pain, one has to feel it
somewhere and where one feels it might as well be where it is.
However, pain emerges from a pattern of activity within the
brain. This means that while pain may not all be in your head,
it is certainly constructed there - it comes from your brain,
not from the body part that is hurting. I will contend that
this model of pain - that pain emerges from the brain when
the brain perceives that tissue is in danger and needs to be
protected - is consistent with the huge amount of experimental
and clinical data in this field. Crucially, there is a growing
body of literature that shows that teaching patients this model
and its biological basis is associated with better pain and
functional outcomes. I will contend that it is not enough to
tell them hurt doesnt equal harm and be active despite
pain. I think we have to convince them - explain how this
works biologically - reconceptualise pain itself. Randomised
controlled trials show that when patients really understand
that anything that affects the brains evaluation of danger to
body tissues should affect pain, they do better than when they
dont understand that. Of course, this is not a trivial task-we
must first convince ourselves - arguably as arduous a task.
Perhaps a nice place to start is to ask ourselves-do we really
get it?
doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2009.10.116
116
Healthy spaces and places
A. Moroney 1,2,3,4 , T. Shilton 3,
1 Planning Institute Of Australia
2 AustralianLocal Government Association
3 National Heart Foundation of Australia
4 Department of Health and Ageing
Introduction: Physical inactivity is estimated to cost the
Australian community around $10 billion annually in direct
health care costs; obesity costs are as high as $5 billion.
Common lifestyle choices of increased inactivity and car
dependency are significant contributors to chronic diseases,
including cardiovascular disease and diabetes. They are also
affecting the sustainability of Australian cities and towns,
particularly given the relationship between greenhouse gas
emissions from motorised transport and climate change.
Research shows that regular physical activity can not only
reduce the risk of chronic disease but also improve peo-
ples mental health and wellbeing. Regular physical activity
undertaken locally also engenders a sense of belonging in
the community. The way streets, neighbourhoods, towns and
cities are planned, designed and built affects the nature of,
and the extent to which people can and do use these places.
Methodology: A unique collaboration has developed
between health, local government and planning peak bodies
across sectoral interests and broadening spheres of influ-
ence, with funding support from the Australian Government
Department of Health and Ageing, to prepare national plan-
ning guidelines to promote the health benefits from the design
and management of places which promote active lifestyles
to built environment professionals. The project provides
guidance to planners on how to incorporate active living prin-
ciples into the built environment. The aim is to improve the
understanding of how the built environment influences active
living, by ensuring that the built environment results in:

people engaging in regular physical activity;

improved sense of belonging and social inclusion;

designing attractive and liveable spaces;

positive health impacts (reducing the future health bur-
den); and

sustainable and healthy communities.
Healthy Spaces and Places project is being developed
through wide consultation and refinement through practi-
tioner testing, to be evidence based and practical resource.
Substantial support has been expressed through the wide
audiences involved in the consultations.
Conclusions: A strength of Healthy Spaces and Places is
that it aims to draw together not only on planners and related
practitioners but also health professionals to address the
challenges of the built environment contributing to lifelong
healthy living. Decision makers, including elected represen-
tatives and senior managers, and communities themselves are