# Snowboard VS Ski injury rates.



## swilber08 (Dec 29, 2009)

killclimbz said:


> Found a pretty interesting article in the Vail Daily today.
> 
> Skiers versus snowboarders: Who gets injured more? | VailDaily.com
> 
> ...


id like to see some actual data and charts rather than just a summary


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

It's all I got. I am sure there is more statistical data available from the doc and the group that did the study. 

A lot of the data already coincides with the date from ski injury. So I don't find anything substantially flawed in it at a glance.


----------



## poutanen (Dec 22, 2011)

killclimbz said:


> So snowboarding has a slightly higher injury rate. I don't think that is any big surprise. The article is a summary not very high detail.


SOOOOOOO many variables it's next to impossible to say.

What percentage of snowboarders report their injuries or seek medical attention? Same for skiers?

What is the typical length of time off from the sport for the average injury for each sport?

What are the demographics of the area in question? Could be more boarders than skiers, hence the higher percentage of injuries.

To me a more interesting study would be the severity of snowboard injuries vs. ski injuries given the same type of accident/fall. Some people feel scared to "have their feet locked in" to a snowboard, but I think this is what helps prevent many leg injuries in snowboarders vs. skiers. The legs support each other in a crash.


----------



## TBomb (Dec 29, 2010)

> The study found the highest rate of injury among young, inexperienced, female snowboarders.


That pretty much sums it up right there :dunno:













Just kidding...not hating on the young ladies out there :thumbsup:


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

I do believe these were injuries requiring medical attention.

Snowboarding has a long documented history of having a slightly more injury prone rate than skiing based on per user day. All that data you are looking for is contained within the ski injury site. I can only lead you to water...


----------



## AcroPhile (Dec 3, 2010)

The article mentions that "22 percent of snowboard injuries occur in the terrain park while compared with 6.5 percent of ski injuries." but it doesn't account for, or mention, the percentage of snowboarders riding terrain park vs percentage of skiers riding terrain park. I think this skews the statistics and inflates the number of snowboard injuries. If terrain park were taken out of the equation, I wonder how the injury rates would compare. Beyond the initial learning period where wrist injuries are most common for snowboarders, I am willing to bet that most snowboard injuries are terrain park related.


----------



## ThunderChunky (Oct 1, 2011)

I feel like snowboarders fall a lot more often and get hurt more, but when skiers do fall it's really bad.


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

ThunderChunky said:


> I feel like snowboarders fall a lot more often and get hurt more, but when skiers do fall it's really bad.


That is my general opinion. Skiers do knees. Fuck that. I'd much rather break a wrist or do a rotator cuff. Of course head injuries do tend to be higher with snowboarders, that is no bueno. 

The terrain park thing, that is a tough one. I'd be interested to know how they were comparing it. The only real way to do it is by skier days spent in the park, not on a percentage of users.


----------



## poutanen (Dec 22, 2011)

killclimbz said:


> I do believe these were injuries requiring medical attention.
> 
> Snowboarding has a long documented history of having a slightly more injury prone rate than skiing based on per user day. All that data you are looking for is contained within the ski injury site. I can only lead you to water...


Looked all over the article and google searched the Journal Article mentioned but found no data. Nevertheless, even if you have a high injury rate per user day of snowboarders vs. skiers, there are still too many variables to say snowboarding is more likely to injure you.

I'm guessing that the skier demographic is on average older and potentially more conservative than snowboarders.

What I don't like is that someone may reach the wrong conclusion reading these stories. If you're just looking at getting into snow sports, and see these articles, you may be inclined to think that you're more likely to get injured learning to snowboard than learning to ski. But this article, and none of the stats I've ever seen can reach that conclusion. I highly doubt there's ever been a controlled study, of an equal sample of people learning to snowboard vs. an equal sample of people learning to ski (ie. same age, physical ability, comfort with risk taking, etc.)

The articles can't say that "person X" is more/less likely to injure themselves in one sport than the other, all they can say is that the *average snowboarder* is more likely to injure themselves than the *average skier*. It's an interesting statement but at the same time doesn't really say anything.


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

Welcome to the all-new www.ski-injury.com! The number 1 site in Google for snow sports safety - Ski Injury, which includes first day participants...

I wasn't referencing the article, but a site that actually compiles the data available. You can cut it up to the Nth degree, but it seems that most studies agree that snowboarding is slightly more injury prone. 

And so what if some people get the wrong conclusion? That is the paranoid douche nozzle freak, that I would rather not have participating in the sport anyway.


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

Plus you can get sage advice like this from the Ski injury site...



> Terrain parks offer exciting challenges to snow sports enthusiasts but should be treated with respect. Althought the absolute risk of an injury is relatively low, the potential for a serious or catastrophic injury is there. The key message is not to stray too far from the limits of your ability and *AVOID LANDING INVERTED*.


Sounds like good advice...


----------



## poutanen (Dec 22, 2011)

killclimbz said:


> And so what if some people get the wrong conclusion? That is the paranoid douche nozzle freak, that I would rather not have participating in the sport anyway.


Fair enough lol...

Just looked at the site and the injury stats alone seem way out to lunch to me. 3-6 injuries per 1000 snowboarder days? Again if this is injuries requiring medical attention, MAYBE, but still maybe I'm way above the curve. I have an injury requiring medical attention probably every 20-30 days on the hill, but I usually don't seek the medical attention.

Shit, I fall every day I'm out and usually have at least one new pain heading home every day. 

If people are going an average of 190 days on the slopes between injuries, people aren't pushing themselves hard enough.

I say MORE INJURIES!!!


----------



## poutanen (Dec 22, 2011)

killclimbz said:


> Sounds like good advice...


Yep, I'm glad that site told me that!!! :laugh:


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

I think if you're rocking the terrain park, that injury rate probably goes up some too. 

Personally, I probably have around 500 days in since the last time I got injured snowboarding. Really hope I am not jinxing myself before my trip this Friday...

I am pretty sure somewhere on the ski injury site, it refers to the fact that these were injuries that were treated by a medical staff. I don't know how else you can tally it. If it's an injury that you don't seek any help for there is no way to document it. If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around...


----------



## JamesX (Feb 26, 2012)

I picked up both ski and snowboard this season. In my limited experience, I am definitely more prone to crashing (and crashing badly) on Snowboard than Ski, at least at my skill level. I have already broken a helmet and pulled my arm muscle on Snowboard, couldn't override my reflex when falling down on a Blue, but have yet broken anything on Skis.


----------



## onefutui2e (Jan 25, 2011)

correlation does not imply causation!


----------



## mixie (Mar 29, 2011)

TBomb said:


> That pretty much sums it up right there :dunno:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


part of that might be due to the ladies are more apt to seek out medical attention and/or report an injury when men will just knock back a drink or two and continue on. I am not offended since while I am female, I am far from being young  but I do board (and bike and hike) with other chicks and I know most of them will check out for the day after what I consider a minor or even non existent injury that most dudes would ignore. No offense to the dudes  but I think most chix have more restraint and fear then most guys. When I ride with my chick friends I am usually the "crazy" one of the bunch. When I ride with my guy friends....Im usually the first to wuss out on something. 

I want to learn to ski, as I ride with a lot of skiers, and sometimes it would be nice to change it up. It's the potential for knee injuries that keep me from it.


----------



## poutanen (Dec 22, 2011)

mixie said:


> part of that might be due to the ladies are more apt to seek out medical attention and/or report an injury when men will just knock back a drink or two and continue on. I am not offended since while I am female, I am far from being young  but I do board (and bike and hike) with other chicks and I know most of them will check out for the day after what I consider a minor or even non existent injury that most dudes would ignore.


Quite possibly... I keep an extra large bottle of advil in my truck and on multi-day trips I usually end up popping one in the morning before I've even hit the hill! I'm there to board not feel hurt.


----------



## sobrob (Mar 2, 2012)

I use to ski but when my knees started going bad because of my illustrious (not) H.S. basketball career I started boarding. After the first day of boarding I picked up wrist guards and have not had a problem with mt wrist ever. I also strap my knee when I go as well. Preventive measures can help decrease these injuries.

I just toe my rotator cuff and am looking to purchase this shoulder protector for mountain biking and next season snowboarding. There is so much technology out there to help. Injuries are the risk, the risk is what gets the blood flowing and makes it fun.

EVS Sports - Products


----------



## jely1990 (Dec 30, 2011)

swilber08 said:


> id like to see some actual data and charts rather than just a summary


The article is an article about a study. The first sentence: "The American Journal of Sports Medicine (Jan. 20, 2012) recently published a study on snowboard injuries versus skier injuries" contains where the study can be found. You'll have to look at the journal for actual data and charts. It is annoying that they didn't include any actual data in the article... that's usually how it is though.


----------



## ThunderChunky (Oct 1, 2011)

Good luck reading through the actual study. Those things are a bitch. Doing it right now for Psychology.


----------



## jely1990 (Dec 30, 2011)

Ya they are. I was curious so I found the study, here's a link if anyone wants to see the abstract and some basics on how data was collected and the study was conducted. Snowboarding Injuries: Trends Over Time and Comparisons With Alpine Skiing Injuries. You have to have a subscription to the journal if you want to see the full study though.


----------



## SnowRock (Feb 28, 2011)

I could probably pull the full study at work tomorrow and give it a read. Typing on my phone so haven't read abstract but one point to make based on things I have seen people post before. 

The study is not flawed or invalid because there are lots of "variables." There are different types of studies, this is likely an observational epidemiology study, so the focus is on identifying and reporting patterns or trends. 

Some of these are case controlled and while they are not as rigorous as a randomized controlled clinical trial... they can still be informative. Not all studies can/will/or need to be RCTs.


----------



## jely1990 (Dec 30, 2011)

Ya it's an observational epidemiology study.


----------



## poutanen (Dec 22, 2011)

SnowRock said:


> The study is not flawed or invalid because there are lots of "variables." There are different types of studies, this is likely an observational epidemiology study, so the focus is on identifying and reporting patterns or trends.


Yeah I certainly never said it was flawed, just that some people may misinterpret it's conclusions... 

Sorry I just love a good debate. I don't even have a horse in this race cause it doesn't matter to me what the outcome it. My dad was a math teacher and my mom a sociologist so I tend to think about society in numbers and variables and math sense.

Makes for an interesting love life! lol


----------



## dcsocal (Mar 21, 2011)

This was actually a pretty decent study to say the least. If you have any questions let me know. Here are some of the numbers you guys were asking about. 










































And an interesting tidbit regarding terrain parks.

"Our data found that snowboarders (control) spent 29.4% of the time in the terrain park but only sustained 22.6% of their injuries while in the park. These findings suggest that injured snowboarders and skiers are underrepresented in the injury population relative to their percentages in the control population, but these differences are not statistically significant.

No previous study has been able to obtain any measure ofexposure to risk in the terrain park, and thus, none could make any definitive comment as to whether the addition of a terrain park to a resort would have any overall effect on the incidence or prevalence of injuries. It is easy enough to say where an injury took place, terrain park or not, but what is the overall effect? We believe that it is only logical to find that the bulk of jumping injuries might occur in a terrain park because that is the only place at the resort where features have been specifically constructed for the purpose of jumping. 

Given that it is preferable that jumping not take place in an ad hoc manner anywhere at the resort, in a perfect world, all jumping injuries would take place in a terrain park, which is not the same as saying terrain parks are dangerous places.

The challenge has been to establish a relationship between the exposure to risk (eg, time spent in a terrain
park) and the occurrence of an injury. This study attempts to answer this important question by asking both members of the injured population and the control populations (skiers and snowboarders) about how much time is spent in a terrain park. 

In this analysis, we have limited ourselves to the third time period: when terrain parks first came into existence. We divided each subpopulation into those who spent some time in a terrain park and those who did not spend any time in a terrain park. On that basis, we find that there is no statistically significant difference between the injury group and the control group. In other words, we did not find, for example, that skiers and snowboarders who spent time in the terrain park were overrepresented in the injury population, as might be expected if the addition of terrain parks increased the risk of injury overall. 

In fact, we found no relationship, thus suggesting that the addition of terrain parks does not
contribute to an increased risk of injury"


----------



## Argo (Feb 25, 2010)

I think this season is an anomaly, I work with the surgeon in the article on a regular basis along with tons more. From what I have seen on our table and in our ER this year it's a butt load of larger bone fractures.... Faster harder snow can be blamed for it... Femurs, tibias, humerus, distal radius, clavicles...... There were a lot less soft tissue injuries like acl/mcl/shoulders than last year when the snow was soft and deep..... 

What is funny is that skiers almost always blame a snowboarder.... Snowboarders always just say they fucked up and wiped out.... We concluded that here is a hateful snowboarder out there taking out skiers.


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

Its too bad that studies don't look into factors and factor analysis...like men v women, experience level, snow conditions, visability, age, home mtn v tourist and etc. These studies are fairly generalized thus can only make relatively meaningless generalizations. As for factor analysis it good for figuring out prevention...but we already know that...take lessons, don't go too far beyond your abilities for the conditions/ride within your limits and get the tour with a local. 

An example, last year being a chaperone for the ski bus, spent some time in the aid huts dealing with kids and visability was the common complaint for most of the injured who happened to be tourist/gapers..."I couldn't see where I was going..all of a sudden I hit a hole/wall/drop and wiped out." Admittedly we have shittay visability...but you can readily determine that they are tourist/inexperienced/gapers by their lens selection...they are wearing lens for bright sun...duh.


----------

