Shorter time to first injury in first year professional football players : A cross-club comparison in the Australian Football League
- Authors: Fortington, Lauren , Berry, Jason , Buttifant, David , Ullah, Shahid , Diamantopoulou, Kathy , Finch, Caroline
- Date: 2014
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport Vol. 19, no. 1 (2014), p.18-23
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/1058737
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: AbstractObjectives Australian Football League (AFL) players have a high risk of injury. Anecdotally, this injury risk is greater in emerging players (i.e. those in their first year), compared with established players (with 3+ years of experience). This study aimed to conduct the first comparison of injury risk and playing experience in these two player groups across a large number of AFL clubs. Design Prospective, cohort. Methods Injuries, game participation and training participation were collected weekly by 8 AFL clubs for 61 emerging and 64 established players. Injury incidence rates (IIR) and Cox proportional hazard models for time to first injury, separately for games and training, were computed. Results The game IIR was significantly higher for emerging than established players: 45.6 (95% CI: 35.7, 57.6) versus 18.3 (95% CI: 13.1, 24.9) per 1000 game-hours. Emerging players also had a higher training IIR than did the established players: 9.6 (95% CI: 7.6, 11.9) versus 8.9 (95% CI: 7.0, 11.1) per 1000 training-hours. Emerging players were significantly less likely to remain injury free in games than established players (HR = 3.46, 95% CI: 1.27, 9.45). A similar outcome was seen in training sessions, although to a lesser degree (HR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.19, 1.69). Conclusions Despite efforts to modify the playing/training program of emerging players, this group remain at greater risk of injury in games and training sessions, compared with established players. Continued efforts should be made toward understanding reasons for this increased risk to better prevent injury during the early years of a professional football career.
Relationship between running loads and soft-tissue injury in elite team sport athletes
- Authors: Gabbett, Tim , Ullah, Shahid
- Date: 2012
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research Vol. 26, no. 4 (2012), p. 953-960
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: 2012-Although the potential link between running loads and soft-tissue injury is appealing, the evidence supporting or refuting this relationship in high-performance team sport athletes is nonexistent, with all published studies using subjective measures (e.g., ratings of perceived exertion) to quantify training loads. The purpose of this study was to investigate the risk of low-intensity (e.g., walking, jogging, total distances) and highintensity (e.g., high acceleration and velocity efforts, repeated high-intensity exercise bouts) movement activities on lower body soft-tissue injury in elite team sport athletes. Thirty-four elite rugby league players participated in this study. Global positioning system data and the incidence of lower body soft-tissue injuries were monitored in 117 skill training sessions during the preseason and in-season periods. The frailty model (an extension of the Cox proportional regression model for recurrent events) was applied to calculate the relative risk of injury after controlling for all other training data. The risk of injury was 2.7 (95% confidence interval 1.2-6.5) times higher when very high-velocity running (i.e., sprinting) exceeded 9 m per session.Greater distances covered in mild, moderate, and maximum accelerations and low- and very low- intensitymovement velocities were associated with a reduced risk of injury. These results demonstrate that greater amounts of very high-velocity running (i.e., sprinting) are associated with an increased risk of lower body soft-tissue injury, whereas distances covered at low and moderate speeds offer a protective effect against soft-tissue injury. From an injury prevention perspective, these findings provide empirical support for restricting the amount of sprinting performed in preparation for elite team sport competition. However, coaches should also consider the consequences of reducing training loads on the development of physical qualities and playing performance. © 2012 National Strength and Conditioning Association.
Reliability of equipment for measuring the ground hardness and traction
- Authors: Twomey, Dara , Otago, Leonie , Ullah, Shahid , Finch, Caroline
- Date: 2011
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology Vol. 225, no. 3 (2011), p. 131-137
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: The aim of this paper is to report the inter-rater reliabilities and intra-rater reliabilities of the Clegg hammer, penetrometer, and studded-boot apparatus used for measuring the mechanical properties of natural turf, and to determine whether the level of experience influences the reliability. Three experienced and three novice testers measured the surface hardness and rotational traction at nine locations on a community-level Australian football oval. A repeated-measures analysis of variance tested for significant differences between the six testers for all equipment, and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to determine the inter-rater reliabilities and intra-rater reliabilities. The ICCs for the reliability between the six testers ranged between 0.77 and 0.87 for the Clegg hammer, ranged between 0.55 and 0.73 for the penetrometer, and equalled 0.51 for the studded-boot apparatus. The inter-rater reliabilities and intra-rater reliabilities were greater for the experienced testers than for the novice testers for the Clegg hammer and penetrometer but the novice testers produced greater inter-rater reliabilities for the studded-boot apparatus. This study highlights the potential variability that can exist between testers using the ground hardness and traction equipment, which has implications for future research involving multiple testers both in agronomic-based studies and in linking the surface properties to the injury risk across multiple venues. © Authors 2011.