Surface shifts and injury in footballers

NewsBot · Jun 7, 2015

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
No association between surface shifts and time-loss overuse injury risk in male professional football
Karolina Kristenson, John Bjørneboe, Markus Waldén, Jan Ekstrand, Thor Einar Andersen, Martin Hägglund
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport; Article in Press

Objectives
To investigate frequent surface shifts and match play on an unaccustomed surface as potential risk factors for injury in Scandinavian male professional football.

Design
Prospective cohort study.

Methods
32 top-division clubs (16 Swedish, 16 Norwegian) were followed during seasons 2010 and 2011. The influence from (1) number of surface shifts (between artificial turf and grass) during five-match sequences, and (2) match play on an unaccustomed surface (other surface than on the home venue) on subsequent overuse injury risk was evaluated with generalised estimating equations (GEE). GEE results are presented with risk ratios and 95% confidence interval (CI). Injury rate was expressed as time loss injuries/1000 hours, and compared between groups with a rate ratio and 95% CI.

Results
No association was found between the number of surface shifts and subsequent overuse injury risk (risk ratio 1.01, 95% CI 0.91-1.12). Furthermore, no difference was seen in subsequent overuse injury risk after match play on unaccustomed compared with accustomed surface (risk ratio 1.04, 95% CI 0.78-1.38). Grass clubs (grass installed at home venue) had a lower match injury rate when playing away matches on artificial turf compared with away matches on grass (rate ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.40-0.89).

Conclusions
This study showed no association between surface shifts or playing matches on an unaccustomed surface and time-loss injury risk in professional football, suggesting that clubs and players can cope with such surface transitions.
Click to expand...

Admin2 · Jun 7, 2015

Related Threads:
Foot & ankle injuries in footballers
Plantar pressures in soccer boots
Osteoarthritis of the foot in former soccer players
Score-Celebration Injuries Among Soccer Players
Can Motor Control Training Lower the Risk of Injury for Professional Football Players?
Recurrence of Achilles tendonitis in football
Footballers' 'repeat injury risk'
Footwear Traction and Lower Extremity Noncontact Injury

NewsBot · Apr 6, 2018

Does variability within natural turfgrass sports fields influence ground-derived injuries?
Straw CM et al
Eur J Sport Sci. 2018 Apr 3:1-10. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2018.1457083

Natural turfgrass sports fields exhibit within-field variations due to climatic conditions, field construction, field management, and foot traffic patterns from field usage. Variations within a field could influence the playing surface predictability and require athletes to make abrupt or frequent adjustments that lead to increased ground-derived injury occurrence. This study introduces a new methodology aimed at evaluating the potential relationship between within-field variations of turfgrass sports field properties and ground-derived athlete injuries. Collegiate Club Sport athletes self-reported ground-derived injuries over two years. Soil moisture, turfgrass quality, surface hardness, and turfgrass shear strength were quantified from their two home fields. Hot spot analysis identified significantly high (hot spots) and low (cold spots) values within the fields. Injury locations were compared to hot spot maps each month. Binomial proportion tests determined if there were differences between observed injury proportions and expected proportions. Twenty-three ground-derived injuries were reported overall. The observed injury proportions occurring in turfgrass quality cold spots [0.52 (95% CI 0.29-0.76)] and soil moisture hot spots [0.43 (95% CI 0.22-0.66)] was significantly higher than expected [0.20 (p < .001) and 0.21 (p < .05), respectively]. Most injuries in significant areas of turfgrass quality, soil moisture, and surface hardness were along edges of hot and cold spots. These results suggest a potential relationship between within-field variations and ground-derived injuries, particularly in transition areas between non-significant and significant high and low values. Future larger-scale studies can incorporate the reported methodology to validate this relationship and implement strategies that reduce ground-derived injuries.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Aug 18, 2021

Force-limiting and the mechanical response of natural turfgrass used in the National Football League: A step toward the elimination of differential lower limb injury risk on synthetic turf
Richard Kent et al
J Biomech. 2021 Aug 6

Lower limb injury rate in the National Football League (NFL) is greater on synthetic turf than on natural turfgrass. Foot loading in potentially injurious situations can be mitigated by damage to natural turfgrass that limits the peak load by allowing relative motion between the foot and the ground. Synthetic turf surfaces do not typically sustain such damage and thus lack such a load-limiting mechanism. To guide innovation in synthetic turf design, this paper reports 1) the peak loads of natural turfgrass when loaded by a cleated footform and 2) corridors that define the load-displacement response. Kentucky bluegrass [Poa pratensis, L.] and two cultivars of hybrid bermudagrass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers × C. transvaalensis Burtt Davy] were tested with two cleat patterns in three loading modes (anterior-posterior or AP translation, medial-lateral or ML translation, and forefoot external rotation) at two power levels (full-power, which generated potentially injurious loads, and reduced-power, which generated horizontal forces similar to non-injurious ground reaction forces applied by an elite athlete during play). All tests generated peak force<4.95 kN and torque<173 Nm, which is in a loading regime that would be expected to mitigate injury risk. In full-power tests, bermudagrass withstood significantly (p < 0.05) greater peak loads than Kentucky bluegrass: (3.86 ± 0.45 kN vs. 2.66 ± 0.23 kN in AP, 3.25 ± 0.45 kN vs. 2.49 ± 0.36 kN in ML, and 144.8 ± 12.0 Nm vs. 126.3 ± 6.1 Nm in rotation). Corridors are reported that describe the load-displacement response aggregated across all surfaces tested.
Click to expand...

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

STrain Analysis and Mapping of the Plantar Surface (STAMPS) of the diabetic foot

Neuromechanical adaptations of foot function to changes in surface stiffness during hopping

Clinical and biomechanical effects of subthreshold random noise on the plantar surface of the foot i

Is the upper surface of the foot orthosis the required shape

Too hot to trot (barefoot)? A study of burns in children caused by sun heated surfaces

acoustical shadowing at the edges of curved surfaces in B-mode ultrasound images

Running surface and heel injury

Share This Page