No Increased Injury Risk on Artificial Turf in Finnish Premier Division Football.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Ville Immonen, Einari Kurittu, Ilari Kuitunen, Tommi Vasankari, Mari Leppänen
{"title":"No Increased Injury Risk on Artificial Turf in Finnish Premier Division Football.","authors":"Ville Immonen, Einari Kurittu, Ilari Kuitunen, Tommi Vasankari, Mari Leppänen","doi":"10.1097/JSM.0000000000001296","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the injury risk between natural grass and artificial turf in the male Finnish premier division (Veikkausliiga) matches during the 2019 league season.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A retrospective reanalysis of prospectively collected season-long injury surveillance cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Finnish elite-level male football.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>All 12 teams of Veikkausliiga participated in the study. All players were eligible to participate. Two hundred thirty-six players took part in the follow-up between February and November 2019.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Matches were played between April and November 2019. Injury data were collected using standard injury reports from the team medicals and weekly player questionnaires. Individual player exposure in matches was collected. Artificial turf was classified as exposure and natural grass as control in the analyses.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Match-related injury incidence and incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) on natural grass and artificial turf.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 113 injuries (65 on artificial turf, 48 on natural grass) in 167 matches (90 on artificial turf, 77 on natural grass) were included. Injury incidence was 27.2/1000 hours on artificial turf and 23.9/1000 hours on natural grass and (IRR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.8-1.7). There was no difference in injury types, anatomical regions, injury recurrence, injury severity, or injury contact. Forwards may have had an increased injury incidence on artificial turf compared with natural grass (IRR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.0-11.8).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study supports previous reports that there is no significant increase in the overall risk of injury in professional football played on artificial turf compared with that on natural grass.</p>","PeriodicalId":10355,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JSM.0000000000001296","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the injury risk between natural grass and artificial turf in the male Finnish premier division (Veikkausliiga) matches during the 2019 league season.

Design: A retrospective reanalysis of prospectively collected season-long injury surveillance cohort study.

Setting: Finnish elite-level male football.

Participants: All 12 teams of Veikkausliiga participated in the study. All players were eligible to participate. Two hundred thirty-six players took part in the follow-up between February and November 2019.

Interventions: Matches were played between April and November 2019. Injury data were collected using standard injury reports from the team medicals and weekly player questionnaires. Individual player exposure in matches was collected. Artificial turf was classified as exposure and natural grass as control in the analyses.

Main outcome measures: Match-related injury incidence and incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) on natural grass and artificial turf.

Results: A total of 113 injuries (65 on artificial turf, 48 on natural grass) in 167 matches (90 on artificial turf, 77 on natural grass) were included. Injury incidence was 27.2/1000 hours on artificial turf and 23.9/1000 hours on natural grass and (IRR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.8-1.7). There was no difference in injury types, anatomical regions, injury recurrence, injury severity, or injury contact. Forwards may have had an increased injury incidence on artificial turf compared with natural grass (IRR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.0-11.8).

Conclusions: This study supports previous reports that there is no significant increase in the overall risk of injury in professional football played on artificial turf compared with that on natural grass.

芬兰足球甲级联赛使用人造草皮不会增加受伤风险。
目的比较2019年赛季芬兰男子足球甲级联赛(Veikkausliiga)比赛中天然草坪和人工草坪的受伤风险:对前瞻性收集的赛季受伤监测队列研究进行回顾性再分析:芬兰男子足球精英联赛:Veikkausliiga联赛的所有12支球队都参与了研究。所有球员均有资格参加。236 名球员参加了 2019 年 2 月至 11 月期间的跟踪调查:比赛时间为 2019 年 4 月至 11 月。通过球队医务人员的标准伤病报告和每周球员调查问卷收集受伤数据。收集球员在比赛中的个人暴露情况。在分析中,人工草皮被归类为暴露,天然草皮被归类为对照:主要结果指标:天然草皮和人造草皮上与比赛相关的受伤发生率和发生率比(IRR),以及 95% 的置信区间(CI):共纳入了 167 场比赛(90 场在人造草皮上,77 场在天然草皮上)中的 113 次受伤(65 次在人造草皮上,48 次在天然草皮上)。人工草坪的受伤发生率为 27.2/1000,天然草坪为 23.9/1000(IRR,1.1;95% CI,0.8-1.7)。在受伤类型、解剖区域、受伤复发率、受伤严重程度或受伤接触方面没有差异。与天然草坪相比,前锋在人工草坪上的受伤发生率可能更高(IRR,3.4;95% CI,1.0-11.8):这项研究支持之前的报告,即在人造草皮上进行职业足球比赛与在天然草皮上进行职业足球比赛相比,受伤的总体风险并没有显著增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
185
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine is an international refereed journal published for clinicians with a primary interest in sports medicine practice. The journal publishes original research and reviews covering diagnostics, therapeutics, and rehabilitation in healthy and physically challenged individuals of all ages and levels of sport and exercise participation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信