One of the most important findings of the present study was that self-reported pain incidence proportion was higher in female athletes and almost half of female athletes compared to one in three male athletes reported pain. We found that one in four female athletes and one in five male athletes were currently using NSAIDs and almost one in two female and male athletes with current pain consumed alcohol. Females with current had greater odds of consuming NSAIDS, after adjusting for confounders.
Female athletes reported greater pain incidence in comparison to males. Females have a greater response to painful stimuli and overall pain reporting,8,9 and are more susceptible to chronic pain conditions, sensitive to pain threshold and tolerance, and readily report pain compared with males.8,9 Despite playing similar sports and competing at the same standard of play, females reported greater pain incidence; however, females were overrepresented in this sample. It should also be noted that these athlete participated different sports, and therefore the physical demands may not be the same. These sport participation discrepancies may alter pain incidence and reporting.28,29 Nevertheless, these results potentially suggest that female collegiate athletes may have different potential pain responses to similar sporting activities, and that clinicians should consider these pain response differences between sexes when monitoring and evaluating collegiate athletes.
Sex differences were observed for the anatomical location of joint pain. Female athletes reported pain in their back, knee, and ankle/foot and males reported pain in their knee, back, and shoulder. Interestingly, while females usually have a higher risk of knee pain,30 these results demonstrated that the greatest pain prevalence was to back in female athletes. Further, prevalence of back pain was greater in female athletes than males. The disparity in back pain reporting has been attributed to hip muscular imbalances due to anatomical and strength differences between sexes.31 Low back pain has also been associated with lower extremity pain and injury in female athletes, such as to the knee or ankle/foot,32 further corroborating our results. The prevalence of lower extremity pain, specifically to the knee and foot/ankle may be due to the increased risk of lower extremity injury in females.30 These anatomical pain discrepancies between females and males should be considered when evaluating and interpreting collegiate athlete pain.
Female athletes that reported current pain had greater odds of currently taking NSAIDs compared to female athletes without pain. NSAIDs are the foremost popular medication consumed to mask musculoskeletal pain.5 Musculoskeletal pain can diminish performance through decreased force production, endurance, or the inability to perform specific athletic skills.33 Due to the high demand and competitive nature of collegiate athletics, collegiate athletes are inclined to try to maintain performance, despite pain and possible injury.3 The statistical models in our study observed that division was not a significant factor in determining NSAID use. Further, athletes potentially use NSAIDs in order to reduce the debilitating effects of pain in pursuit of remaining competitive and available.18 Within this study, 28% of female athletes were currently taking NSAIDs, which is comparable to previous literature.26 Interestingly, 43% reported self-purchasing NSAIDs, 16% received NSAIDs from family members, while only 12% received NSAIDs from athletic trainers or team physicians, and it is unknown if these athletes sought medical advice prior to NSAID consumption. Only one study has previously investigated where collegiate athletes receive their NSAIDs, finding higher proportions of NSAID purchase by the individual athletes (59%) and family members (22%).26 However, this study only investigated male college athletes at one institution.26 As NSAIDs are relatively cheap and can be obtained over the counter, there is a low barrier to obtaining these drugs. Athletes have shown a general lack of knowledge concerning the ability to identify the differences between athletic soreness and injury, and the implications and side effects of NSAID use.22 These educational and discriminatory issues can have important harmful health consequences, possibly contributing to increased injury or drug side effects.22 Collegiate athletic departments, no matter the NCAA division level, and sports medicine clinicians need to educate athletes and their families on proper NSAID use, and identify barriers to monitoring NSAID consumption in athletes.
Male collegiate athletes reported an 8% lower use of NSAIDs in comparison to female athletes. Further, while there was a greater unadjusted odds of NSAID use, after adjusting for confounders, there was no relationship. As stated previously, females are more at risk to have pain, which may be due to hormonal differences between sexes.34 These potential biological differences may explain these NSAID use discrepancies. However, while these results are disparate in comparison to the female college athletes, with the significant decrease in the male sample (Females: 75%, Males: 25% of all respondents) and reported wide confidence intervals, these results should be interpreted with caution.
Limitations
As with all studies, there were limitations. Pain is multidimensional and the epidemiological profile of pain can change throughout the year. Collegiate athletes train and compete in sport throughout the year and our data only provide a snapshot at a single point in time. Therefore, ongoing surveillance is needed to understand the seasonal changes to the athlete pain profile and NSAID use throughout the year. One obvious limitation of a cross-section study like this is the potential for recall bias, particularly for injury and surgical history and off-season NSAID use. It is also possible that athletes may have over or under reported their NSAID use. Also pain perception is subjective. However, use of questions from previously validated surveys for pain26 and NSAID4 use could limit the impact by being comparable to previous literature. Another limitation is that the response rate was 26% and most of the responding athletes were females, thus generalisability of our findings might be limited in male collegiate athlete populations. However, research into female athletes are limited; thus, these data help address the general lack of research into the female athlete. Only a small number of athletes participating in collision sports completed the survey, limiting generalisability of these results to these populations as pain profiles might be different. Further, most athletes included in this study were Caucasian, decreasing the generalisability of these findings to other ethnic groups. However, typically collegiate athletes are homogenous population, and therefore behaviours such as NSAID use and accessing these medications, and alcohol use might be similar. Finally, as only an online survey was used, results might be subject to single method bias. As pain and pain management is complex, mix methods and qualitative research are needed explore these complex multi-dimensional constructs.