REF-832 · Gosling et al., 2008 · Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, Vol. · Paper · PubMed

Triathlon Related Musculoskeletal Injuries: The Status of Injury Prevention Knowledge

C+thin evidenceMeasured on a mixed groupWritten before October 2026, being re-checked

This review summarised the published research on triathlon injuries using the Translating Research into Injury Prevention Practice (TRIPP) framework.

Studies had addressed injury incidence, injury profile and contributing factors (TRIPP Stages 1 and 2), but most were retrospective with long, unvalidated recall periods, used inconsistent definitions of a reportable injury and of exposure, or did not capture exposure at all.

The authors conclude that the lack of good prospective studies leaves the evidence unable to inform injury-prevention strategies (TRIPP Stages 3-6) for triathlon.

Participants

Not applicable — a review of published peer-reviewed English-language studies of triathlon injury. The number of studies is not given in the abstract.

Protocol

Relevant articles on triathlon injuries sourced from peer-reviewed English-language journals.
Each assessed against the TRIPP framework: Stages 1 and 2 (injury surveillance; aetiology and mechanism), Stages 3-6 (developing, testing and implementing prevention).
No systematic search method or pooled analysis is described in the abstract.

Key Results

The published literature has a significant knowledge gap on the incidence of injury, the profile of injuries sustained and the evidence for preventing injury in triathlon.
Most studies addressing TRIPP Stages 1 and 2 were limited by retrospective designs with substantial, unvalidated recall periods; inconsistent definitions of a reportable injury and of exposure; or no exposure data at all.
The paucity of quality prospective studies means the evidence could not inform injury-prevention strategies (TRIPP Stages 3-6).
The abstract gives no injury rates, injury sites or risk-factor estimates.

Practical Application

**Is there a proven way to prevent triathlon injuries?Not as of this review: after assessing the published triathlon injury studies against the TRIPP framework, the authors found mostly retrospective, recall-based studies with inconsistent injury definitions and missing exposure data, too weak to inform any prevention strategy.** An athlete or coach asking for "the triathlon injury-prevention protocol" should hear that none is established from triathlon data; prevention has to be borrowed from the single-sport evidence.
Do not quote a triathlon injury rate or "most common injury" from this entry: the abstract gives none, and the review's own point is that the rates in the literature are unreliable.
Not from this paper; the base's own practice: most of a triathlete's injury exposure is running, so running load management (REF-564, REF-565) is the evidence the coach actually has; progress run load gradually and treat a persistent pain site as the signal.
Inference, not tested here: logging each session by sport, with any pain or niggle, is the prospective exposure record the review says is missing, and it is the athlete's own best injury data.

Limitations

Older narrative review; the abstract states no search strategy, number of studies or quality scoring.
Its conclusion is about the state of the evidence then; later prospective triathlon injury studies are not covered.
No injury incidence, site or risk-factor numbers in the abstract, so nothing quantitative can be cited from this entry.
Written from the abstract and record metadata only (full text not read).
How this entry was checked and changed
Why this level

narrative review; its finding is that the evidence is missing