Search

Background Playing football is associated with a high risk of injury. Injury prevention is a priority as injuries not only negatively impact health but also potentially performance. Various multi-component exercise-based injury prevention programs for football players have been examined in studies. Objective We aimed to investigate the efficacy of multi-component exercise-based injury prevention programs among footballers of all age groups in comparison to a control group. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and cluster-randomized controlled trials. CINAHL, Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to June 2022. The following inclusion criteria were used for studies to determine their eligibility: they (1) include football (soccer) players; (2) investigate the preventive effect of multi-component exercise-based injury prevention programs in football; (3) contain original data from a randomized or cluster-randomized trial; and (4) investigate football injuries as the outcome. The risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE), respectively. The outcome measures were the risk ratio (RR) between the intervention and the control group for the overall number of injuries and body region-specific, contact, and non-contact injuries sustained during the study period in training and match play. Results Fifteen randomized and cluster-randomized controlled trials with 22,177 players, 5080 injuries, and 1,587,327 exposure hours fulfilled the inclusion criteria and reported the required outcome measures. The point estimate (RR) for the overall number of injuries was 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59–0.85; 95% prediction interval [PI] 0.38–1.32) with very low-quality evidence. The point estimate (RR) for lower limb injuries was 0.82 (95% CI 0.71–0.94; 95% PI 0.58–1.15) with moderate-quality evidence; for hip/groin injuries, the RR was 0.56 (95% CI 0.30–1.05; 95% PI 0.00–102.92) with low-quality evidence; for knee injuries, the RR was 0.69 (95% CI 0.52–0.90; 95% PI 0.31–1.50) with low-quality evidence; for ankle injuries, the RR was 0.73 (95% CI 0.55–0.96; 95% PI 0.36–1.46) with moderate-quality evidence; and for hamstring injuries, the RR was 0.83 (95% CI 0.50–1.37) with low-quality evidence. The point estimate (RR) for contact injuries was 0.70 (95% CI 0.56–0.88; 95% PI 0.40–1.24) with moderate-quality evidence, while for non-contact injuries, the RR was 0.78 (95% CI 0.55–1.10; 95% PI 0.25–2.47) with low-quality evidence. Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis indicated that the treatment effect associated with the use of multi-component exercise-based injury prevention programs in football is uncertain and inconclusive. In addition, the majority of the results are based on low-quality evidence. Therefore, future high-quality trials are needed to provide more reliable evidence. Clinical Trial Registration PROSPERO CRD42020221772.

Identifying players or circumstances associated with an increased risk of injury is fundamental for successful risk management in football. So far, time-constant and volatile risk factors are generally considered separately in either a screening (constant) or a monitoring (volatile) approach each resulting in a restricted set of explanatory variables. Consequently, improvements in predictive accuracy may be expected when screening and monitoring data are combined, especially when analysed with current machine learning (ML) techniques.This trial was designed as a prospective observational cohort study aiming to forecast non-contact time-loss injuries in male professional football (soccer). Injuries were registered according to the Fuller consensus. Gradient boosting with ROSE upsampling within a leave-one-out cross-validation was used for data analysis. The hierarchical data structure was considered throughout. Different splits of the original dataset were used to probe the robustness of results.Data of 88 players from 4 teams and 51 injuries could be analysed. The cross-validated performance of the gradient boosted model (ROC area under the curve 0.61) was promising and higher compared to models without integration of screening data. Importantly, holdout test set performance was similar (ROC area under the curve 0.62) indicating prospect of generalizability to new cases. However, the variation of predictive accuracy and feature importance with different splits of the original dataset reflects the relatively low number of events.It is concluded that ML-based injury forecasting based on the integration of screening and monitoring data is promising. However, external prospective verification and continued model development are required.

Ruptures of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) typically occur in professional football and epidemiological data about longitudinal injury development is needed. This practice-driven investigation of media-derived ACL data provides information about professional football over 10 years. Injury registration was based on "kicker" sports magazine information that have been recorded over one decade in a standardized manner. Only ACL ruptures in the first German football league were included when they could be verified by a second reliable source. Level of evidence: III. Fifty-seven primary ACL ruptures were verified in the first German football league during the seasons 2007/2008 to 2016/2017. Among them, six re-injuries were found. Mean age at the time of injury was 24.8 years (SD 3.8). 31% (

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of a newly developed warm-up programme ('11+ Kids') regarding its potential to reduce injuries in children's football.METHODS: Children's football teams (under 9 years, under 11 years, and under 13 years age groups) from Switzerland, Germany, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands were invited. Clubs were randomised to an intervention group and a control group, and followed for one season. The intervention group replaced their usual warm-up by '11+ Kids', while the control group warmed up as usual. The primary outcome was the overall risk of football-related injuries. Secondary outcomes were the risks of severe and lower extremity injuries. We calculated hazard ratios using extended Cox models, and performed a compliance analysis.RESULTS: In total, 292,749 h of football exposure of 3895 players were recorded. The mean age of players was 10.8 (standard deviation 1.4) years. During the study period, 374 (intervention group = 139; control group = 235) injuries occurred. The overall injury rate in the intervention group was reduced by 48% compared with the control group (hazard ratio 0.52; 95% confidence interval 0.32-0.86). Severe (74% reduction, hazard ratio 0.26; 95% confidence interval 0.10-0.64) and lower extremity injuries (55% reduction, hazard ratio 0.45; 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.84) were also reduced. Injury incidence decreased with increasing compliance.CONCLUSION: '11+ Kids' is efficacious in reducing injuries in children's football. We observed considerable effects for overall, severe and lower extremity injuries. The programme should be performed at least once per week to profit from an injury preventive effect. However, two sessions per week can be recommended to further increase the protective benefit.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02222025.

Purpose: despite being commonly used, the interaction between Functional Movement Screen (FMS™) score and injury in any elite football population has not been studied. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between FMS™ score and non-contact injury among elite youth players from a Premier League football academy. Materials and methods: eighty-four players were screened during the pre-season period and non-contact injuries recorded prospectively for the entirety of the 2013/14 football season. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to explore the relationships between the individual sub-tests of the FMS™ and injury. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the predictive value of the FMS™ composite score. Results: logistic regression revealed no relationships between score achieved on the individual sub-tests and injury. ROC curves indicated poor predictive ability of the composite score. Players scoring below the identified cut-off values (≤14 or ≤15 depending on injury type considered) were 0.66 (95%CI: 0.40-1.10), 0.70 (95%CI: 0.32-1.57) and 1.52 (95%CI: 0.50-4.61) times as likely to suffer ‘any’, ‘overuse’ and ‘severe’ injuries respectively than those who scored above the identified cut-off values. Conclusions: there was no relationship between FMS™ score and injury. It was unable to predict any non-contact injury among English Premier League youth academy players. Practical implications: The present findings suggest that the FMS™ should not be used for risk stratification among young elite soccer players since the composite score was unrelated to injury likelihood. However, the FMS™ may be useful in other ways. For example, it may provide useful information to applied practitioners when designing strength-training programs for groups of players they are unfamiliar with, as is often the case at the start of a new season.

Background The association between movement quality and injury is equivocal. No soccer-specific movement assessment has been prospectively investigated in relation to injury risk. Objectives To investigate the association between a soccer-specific movement-quality assessment and injury risk among semiprofessional soccer players. Methods In this prospective cohort study, semiprofessional soccer players (n = 306) from 12 clubs completed the Soccer Injury Movement Screen (SIMS) during the preseason period. Individual training/match exposure and noncontact time-loss injuries were recorded prospectively for the entirety of the 2016 season. Relative risks were calculated, and presented with 90% confidence intervals, for the SIMS composite and individual subtest scores from generalized linear models with Poisson distribution offset for exposure. Results When considering noncontact time-loss lower extremity injuries (primary level of analysis), there was a most likely trivial association with the SIMS composite score. Similarly, the SIMS composite score demonstrated most likely to likely trivial associations with all injury categories included in the secondary level of analysis (noncontact time-loss hip/groin, thigh, knee, and ankle injuries). When considering hamstring strains and ankle sprains specifically (tertiary level of analysis), the SIMS composite score demonstrated very likely trivial associations. A total of 262 noncontact time-loss injuries were recorded. The overall (training and match exposure combined) incidence of noncontact time-loss injury was 12/1000 hours. Conclusion The SIMS composite score demonstrated no association with any of the investigated categories of soccer-related injury. The SIMS composite score should not be used to group players into high- or low-risk groups. Level of Evidence Prognosis, level 4. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(8):630-636. Epub 8 May 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.8037.

There is a lack of injury data for the population of veteran football players. Therefore, a prospective study was conducted to investigate injury incidences and characteristics. Over one season, injuries and exposure of 18 teams (n = 265 players, age: 44.2±7.3 years, BMI: 26.6±3.2 kg/m(2)) were documented. Sixty-three players sustained a total of 88 injuries during the season. The incidence of training injuries (4.5 per 1000 hours) was significantly lower than of match injuries (24.7 per 1000 hours). The majority of injuries (n = 73; 83%) were located at the lower extremities, 52 (47%) were muscle injuries. The injury incidence of veteran football players is similar to other male football players of different skill levels and age groups, indicating a need for the implementation of preventive measures. Prevention programmes should consider the specific injury characteristics, with more muscle injuries in this population compared with younger football players.

Objective To identify risk situations promoting head injuries in professional male football (soccer) and to investigate the impact of a rule change in 2006 punishing elbow-head contacts. Design Analysis of video sequences of head events leading to head injury. Participants Professional football players of the first male German Bundesliga. Main outcome measures Observational criteria of head impacts on video recordings (players' actions preceding head injuries, foul play-referee's decision and assessment of rater, ball possession, on-pitch medical treatment, and consequences of head impact). Results Three hundred thirty-four head injuries were reported in kicker Sportmagazin corresponding to an incidence rate of 2.25 (95% confidence interval 2.01-2.51) per 1000 player match hours. The injured player predominantly jumped (60%), headed the ball (36%), or ran forwards (20%); the noninjured players mainly jumped (64%), headed the ball (27%), or raised the elbow to the head (23%). Free ball situations (2 players challenge for the ball) caused most of the head injuries (81%). The players' action "raising the elbow" during a head injury seemed to be lower after the rule change. Conclusions Jumping for the ball with the intention of heading is the predominant action associated with head injury risk. Head injuries occur most often when players challenge for the ball in a header duel. As head injuries bear the potential risk of long-term health sequelae, the identification of situational circumstances is essential to develop preventative means in the future.

The warm-up programme "FIFA 11+" has been shown to reduce football injuries in different populations, but so far veteran players have not been investigated. Due to differences in age, skill level and gender, a simple transfer of these results to veteran football is not recommended. The purpose of this study was to investigate the preventive effects of the "FIFA 11+" in veteran football players. Twenty veteran football teams were recruited for a prospective 9-month (1 season) cluster-randomised trial. The intervention group (INT, n = 146; 45 ± 8 years) performed the "FIFA 11+" at the beginning of each training session, while the control group (CON, n = 119; 43 ± 6 years) followed its regular training routine. Player exposure hours and injuries were recorded according to an international consensus statement. No significant difference was found between INT and CON in overall injury incidence (incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 0.91 [0.64-1.48]; P = 0.89). Only severe injuries reached statistical significance with higher incidence in CON (IRR: 0.46 [0.21-0.97], P = 0.04). Regular conduction (i.e. once a week) of the "FIFA 11+" did not prevent injuries in veteran footballers under real training and competition circumstances. The lack of preventive effects is likely due to the too low overall frequency of training sessions.

BackgroundAbsolute numbers of head injuries in football (soccer) are considerable because of its high popularity and the large number of players. In 2006 a rule was changed to reduce head injuries. Players were given a red card (sent off) for intentional elbow-head contact.AimsTo describe the head injury mechanism and examine the effect of the rule change.MethodsBased on continuously recorded data from the German football magazine “kicker”, a database of all head injuries in the 1st German Male Bundesliga was generated comprising seasons 2000/01-2012/13. Injury mechanisms were analysed from video recordings. Injury incidence rates (IR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) as well as incidence rate ratios (IRR) to assess differences before and after the rule change were calculated.Results356 head injuries were recorded (IR 2.22, 95% CI 2.00 to 2.46 per 1000 match hours). Contact with another player caused most head injuries, more specifically because of head-head (34%) or elbow-head (17%) contacts. After the rule change, head injuries were reduced by 29% (IRR 0.71, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.86, p=0.002). Lacerations/abrasions declined by 42% (95% CI 0.39 to 0.85), concussions by 29% (95% CI 0.46 to 1.09), contusions by 18% (95% CI 0.43 to 1.55) and facial fractures by 16% (95% CI 0.55 to 1.28).ConclusionsThis rule change appeared to reduce the risk of head injuries in men’s professional football.

Context: The winter break in the top 2 German professional soccer leagues was shortened from 6.5 to 3.5 weeks in the 2009–2010 season. Objective: To investigate whether this change affected injury characteristics by comparing the second half of the 2008–2009 (long winter break) with the equivalent period in the 2009–2010 season (short winter break). Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: German male professional soccer leagues. Patients or Other Participants: Seven professional German male soccer teams (184 players in the 2008–2009 season, 188 players in the 2009–2010 season). Main Outcome Measure(s): Injury incidences and injury characteristics (cause of injury, location, severity, type, diagnosis), including their monthly distribution, were recorded. Results: A total of 300 time-loss injuries (2008–2009 n = 151, 2009–2010 n = 149) occurred. The overall injury incidence per 1000 soccer hours was 5.90 (95% confidence interval = 5.03, 6.82) in 2008–2009 and 6.55 (5.58, 7.69) in 2009–2010. Match injuries per 1000 hours were 31.5 (25.0, 38.0) in the first season and 26.5 (20.2, 32.7) in the second season; the corresponding training values were 2.67 (2.08–3.44) and 3.98 (3.19–4.95), respectively. The training injury incidence (incidence rate ratio = 1.49 [95% confidence interval = 1.07, 2.08], P = .02) and the risk of sustaining a knee injury (incidence rate ratio = 1.66 [1.00, 2.76], P = .049) were higher in 2009–2010 after the short winter break; the incidence of moderate and severe injuries (time loss >7 days) trended higher (incidence rate ratio = 1.34 [0.96, 1.86], P = .09). Conclusions: Shortening the winter break from 6.5 to 3.5 weeks did not change the overall injury incidence; however, a higher number of training, knee, and possibly more severe injuries (time loss >7 days) occurred.