Dataset Information

General versus sports-specific injury prevention programs in athletes: A systematic review on the effects on performance.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Injury prevention programs (IPPs) are an inherent part of training in recreational and professional sports. Providing performance-enhancing benefits in addition to injury prevention may help adjust coaches and athletes' attitudes towards implementation of injury prevention into daily routine. Conventional thinking by players and coaches alike seems to suggest that IPPs need to be specific to one's sport to allow for performance enhancement. The systematic literature review aims to firstly determine the IPPs nature of exercises and whether they are specific to the sport or based on general conditioning. Secondly, can they demonstrate whether general, sports-specific or even mixed IPPs improve key performance indicators with the aim to better facilitate long-term implementation of these programs? METHODS:PubMed and Web of Science were electronically searched throughout March 2018. The inclusion criteria were randomized control trials, publication dates between Jan 2006 and Feb 2018, athletes (11-45 years), injury prevention programs and included predefined performance measures that could be categorized into balance, power, strength, speed/agility and endurance. The methodological quality of included articles was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration assessment tools. RESULTS:Of 6619 initial findings, 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. In addition, reference lists unearthed a further 6 studies, making a total of 28. Nine studies used sports specific IPPs, eleven general and eight mixed prevention strategies. Overall, general programs ranged from 29-57% in their effectiveness across performance outcomes. Mixed IPPs improved in 80% balance outcomes but only 20-44% in others. Sports-specific programs led to larger scale improvements in balance (66%), power (83%), strength (75%), and speed/agility (62%). CONCLUSION:Sports-specific IPPs have the strongest influence on most performance indices based on the significant improvement versus control groups. Other factors such as intensity, technical execution and compliance should be accounted for in future investigations in addition to exercise modality.

SUBMITTER: Plummer A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6715272 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

General versus sports-specific injury prevention programs in athletes: A systematic review on the effects on performance.

Plummer Ashley A Mugele Hendrik H Steffen Kathrin K Stoll Josefine J Mayer Frank F Müller Juliane J

PloS one 20190829 8

<h4>Introduction</h4>Injury prevention programs (IPPs) are an inherent part of training in recreational and professional sports. Providing performance-enhancing benefits in addition to injury prevention may help adjust coaches and athletes' attitudes towards implementation of injury prevention into daily routine. Conventional thinking by players and coaches alike seems to suggest that IPPs need to be specific to one's sport to allow for performance enhancement. The systematic literature review a ...[more]

PMID: 31465458

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: Neuromuscular injury prevention programs (IPP) can reduce injury rate by about 40% in youth sport. Multimodal IPP include, for instance, balance, strength, power, and agility exercises. Our systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of multimodal IPP on neuromuscular performance in youth sports. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search including selected search terms related to youth sports, injury prevention, and neuromuscular performance. Inclusion criteria were: (i) the study was a (cluster-)randomized controlled trial (RCT), and (ii) investigated healthy participants, up to 20 years of age and involved in organized sport, (iii) an intervention arm performing a multimodal IPP was compared to a control arm following a common training regime, and (iv) neuromuscular performance parameters (e.g., balance, power, strength, sprint) were assessed. Furthermore, we evaluated IPP effects on sport-specific skills. Results: Fourteen RCTs (comprising 704 participants) were analyzed. Eight studies included only males, and five only females. Seventy-one percent of all studies investigated soccer players with basketball, field hockey, futsal, Gaelic football, and hurling being the remaining sports. The average age of the participants ranged from 10 years up to 19 years and the level of play from recreational to professional. Intervention durations ranged from 4 weeks to 4.5 months with a total of 12 to 57 training sessions. We observed a small overall effect in favor of IPP for balance/stability (Hedges' g = 0.37; 95%CI 0.17, 0.58), leg power (g = 0.22; 95%CI 0.07, 0.38), and isokinetic hamstring and quadriceps strength as well as hamstrings-to-quadriceps ratio (g = 0.38; 95%CI 0.21, 0.55). We found a large overall effect for sprint abilities (g = 0.80; 95%CI 0.50, 1.09) and sport-specific skills (g = 0.83; 95%CI 0.34, 1.32). Subgroup analyses revealed larger effects in high-level (g = 0.34-1.18) compared to low-level athletes (g = 0.22-0.75), in boys (g = 0.27-1.02) compared to girls (g = 0.09-0.38), in older (g = 0.32-1.16) compared to younger athletes (g = 0.18-0.51), and in studies with high (g = 0.35-1.16) compared to low (g = 0.12-0.38) overall number of training sessions. Conclusion: Multimodal IPP beneficially affect neuromuscular performance. These improvements may substantiate the preventative efficacy of IPP and may support the wide-spread implementation and dissemination of IPP. The study has been a priori registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016053407).

Project description:BackgroundA large volume of systematic reviews and meta-analyses has been published on the effectiveness of sports injury prevention programs.PurposeTo provide a qualitative summary of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses that have examined the effectiveness of sports injury prevention programs on reducing musculoskeletal injuries.Study designSystematic review; Level of evidence, 4.MethodsWe searched the PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and the Cochrane databases for systematic reviews and meta-analyses that evaluated the effectiveness of sports injury prevention programs. We excluded published abstracts, narrative reviews, articles not published in English, commentaries, studies that described sports injury prevention strategies but did not assess their effectiveness, studies that did not assess musculoskeletal injuries, and studies that did not assess sports-related injuries. The most relevant results were extracted and summarized. Levels of evidence were determined per the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, and methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR-2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews, revised version).ResultsA total of 507 articles were retrieved, and 129 were included. Articles pertaining to all injuries were divided into 9 topics: sports and exercise in general (n = 20), soccer (n = 13), ice hockey (n = 1), dance (n = 1), volleyball (n = 1), basketball (n = 1), tackle collision sports (n = 1), climbing (n = 1), and youth athletes (n = 4). Articles on injuries by anatomic site were divided into 11 topics: general knee (n = 8), anterior cruciate ligament (n = 34), ankle (n = 14), hamstring (n = 11), lower extremity (n = 10), foot (n = 6), groin (n = 2), shoulder (n = 1), wrist (n = 2), and elbow (n = 1). Of the 129 studies, 45.7% were ranked as evidence level 1, and 55.0% were evidence level 2. Based on the AMSTAR-2, 58.9% of the reviews reported a priori review methods, 96.1% performed a comprehensive literature search, 47.3% thoroughly described excluded articles, 79.1% assessed risk of bias for individual studies, 48.8% reported a valid method for statistical combination of data (ie, meta-analysis), 45.0% examined the effect of risk of bias on pooled study results, and 19.4% examined the risk for publication bias.ConclusionThis comprehensive review provides sports medicine providers with a single source of the most up-to-date publications in the literature on sports injury prevention.

Project description:BackgroundFor professional athletes, sports injury has been considered one of the most influential factors determining their athletic careers' duration and quality. High-intensity training and competitiveness of the sports competition are perhaps critical causes of sports-related stress. This article reviews the relevant research on sports injuries and stressor-related disorders. Further, it explores the following three issues in depth: (1) Do physical injuries caused by competitive sports lead to acute or posttraumatic stress disorder for athletes? What are the abnormal stress responses? (2) What diagnoses are currently available for sports injury related traumatic stress disorder? (3) What kinds of psychological rehabilitation are available for trauma-related symptoms in sports injury? How efficient are they in alleviating these symptoms?MethodsThe study searched electronic databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, etc. And reference lists of included papers were also screened. Two researchers selected the literature strictly according to the inclusion criteria and sorted them out. Based on the proved conclusions, the study established a new framework to manage traumatic stress disorders after the injury occurred.Results16 articles were included in the study. (Q1: N = 10; Q2: N = 3; Q3: N = 3 ) The findings of this review suggested that athletes who suffer from sports injuries are more likely to experience abnormal physiological or psychological stress responses, which may become a massive challenge for athletes to continue their sports careers at a competitive level. However, there is a minimal understanding of addressing sports injury-related traumatic stress disorder from a biological perspective. Thus, it is challenging to build a scientific basis for diagnosis, screening, and treatment. In addition, the current diagnostic tool for athletes stress disorder still heavily relies on subjective measurement, and the treatment plan is not different from that of the general population.ConclusionsIt highlighted that sports-related stress disorder could be the greatest challenge to return to competition for injured athletes. The present study indicated the importance of systematically identifying the symptoms of sports-related stress disorder and improving the current diagnosis and treatment system.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The effect of socioeconomic status (SES) on rates of sports specialization and injury among youth athletes has not been described previously. HYPOTHESIS:Young athletes from lower socioeconomic status will have lower rates of sports specialization and subsequently lower risk of overuse injuries. STUDY DESIGN:Cohort study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Level 3. METHODS:Injured athletes aged 7 to 18 years were recruited from 2 hospital-based sports medicine clinics and compared with uninjured athletes presenting for sports physicals at primary care clinics between 2010 and 2013. Participants completed surveys on training patterns. Electronic medical records provided injury details as well as patient zip code, race, and health insurance type. SES was estimated from zip codes. The sample was divided into SES tertiles. Analysis of variance and multivariate regression were used for continuous variables, and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to explore relationships between risk factors and injury. RESULTS:Of 1190 athletes surveyed, 1139 (96%) had satisfactory SES data. Compared with low-SES athletes, high-SES athletes reported more hours per week spent playing organized sports (11.2 ± 6.0 vs 10.0 ± 6.5; P = 0.02), trained more months per year in their main sport (9.7 ± 3.1 vs 7.6 ± 3.7; P < 0.01), were more often highly specialized (38.9% vs 16.6%; P < 0.01), and had increased participation in individual sports (64.8% vs 40.0%; P < 0.01). The proportion of athletes with a greater than 2:1 ratio of weekly hours in organized sports to free play increased with SES. Accounting for age and weekly organized sports hours, the odds of reporting a serious overuse injury increased with SES (odds ratio, 1.5; P < 0.01). CONCLUSION:High-SES athletes reported more serious overuse injuries than low-SES athletes, potentially due to higher rates of sports specialization, more hours per week playing organized sports, higher ratio of weekly hours in organized sports to free play, and greater participation in individual sports. CLINICAL RELEVANCE:As SES increases, young athletes report higher degrees of sports specialization, greater participation in individual sports, and more serious overuse injuries.

Dataset Information

General versus sports-specific injury prevention programs in athletes: A systematic review on the effects on performance.

Publications

General versus sports-specific injury prevention programs in athletes: A systematic review on the effects on performance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets