Risk of injury in elite football played on artificial turf versus natural grass: a prospective two-cohort study

Ekstrand, Jan; Timpka, Toomas; Hägglund, Martin

doi:10.1136/bjsm.2006.027623

Cited by 202 publications

(206 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

155

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…16,27,28 Nevertheless, evidence remains indicating persistent differences between injuries sustained on the two different surfaces. [29][30][31][32][33] None of these studies reported what characteristics of the playing surface were directly attributable for the injury rates witnessed, nor did they objectively scrutinise the pitches. This suggests an inherent assumption amongst some researchers that pitches remain constant over time.…”

Section: Current Evidence That Natural Turf Pitches Affect Injury Incmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can the natural turf pitch be viewed as a risk factor for injury within Association Football?

Rennie¹,

Vanrenterghem

Littlewood

et al. 2016

Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tObjectives: A review of the current literature is used to propose a 'conceptual model for relative pitch hardness' and how this may affect incidence of injury within Association Football. Based upon the injury risk and causation model of Meeuwisse et al. (Clin J Sport Med 2007; 17(3):215), it may provide researchers a necessary framework to guide future research investigations. Design: A literature review. Methods: A comprehensive search of electronic databases available until October 2014, and supplemental hand searching was conducted to identify relevant studies. Studies were deemed relevant if they met the following criteria: published in English, presented or referenced in an epidemiological study or provided data directly and/or related to the surface of the football pitch, ball or boot to surface interaction and injury. Further information was sourced on surface hardness, players' movement patterns and physiological demands within football. Results: Papers varied in methodological quality, with comparative studies examining injury rates on artificial versus natural turf pitches being most prevalent. No prospective studies were found that objectively measured the relationship between hardness of natural turf and injury risk within football. Conclusions: The literature review into natural turf pitches and injury within football has largely been unable to confirm that pitch hardness can be viewed as a significant extrinsic risk factor. Methodological concerns, including objectivity in pitch assessment and uniformity in defining injuries undermine the efficacy of available work. Future studies are needed utilising objective assessment tools to draw more definitive conclusions regarding pitch hardness as an extrinsic factor for injury within football.

show abstract

Section: Current Evidence That Natural Turf Pitches Affect Injury Incmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can the natural turf pitch be viewed as a risk factor for injury within Association Football?

Rennie¹,

Vanrenterghem

Littlewood

et al. 2016

Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among outdoor players, 80-90 per cent of all injuries are to the lower extremity [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] , the most common sites of injury among male elite players being thigh (23%), knee (20%), ankle (13%) and hip/groin (12%). Overuse was the most common type of injury comprising almost one third of injuries and typically affecting the groin, knee and lower leg.…”

Section: Fig 3 Different Types Of Injury (%)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemiology of football injuries

Ekstrand

2008

Science & Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimThe overall aim of this on-going injury study is to increase the safety in football. Study designProspective cohort survey Methods.The study population consisted of two cohorts: The UEFA Champions League (UCL) cohort and the Swedish Superleague cohort. The UEFA Champions League (UCL) cohort with 17 teams from 9 countries was followed over five consecutive seasons (2001 to 2006). The Swedish Super-league with 14 teams was followed for two full consecutive seasons (2001 and 2002). Exposure for training and matches in the club and in national teams was registered in minutes for each player. The team doctor reported all injuries causing the player to miss at least one match or training session. The study follows the consensus on methods for studies on football injuries agreed upon by FIFA and UEFA. Results.Totally 6300 injuries have been registered during 800.000 hours of exposure. The incidence of injury at top level football is 6-9 injuries/1000 hours of total exposure (3-5 injuries/1000 training hours and 24-30 injuries/1000 matchhours). As a mean, a team of 25 players can expect 40-50 injuries per season, half of them causing absence less than a week but 6-p of them causing absence more than a month. The risk of injury has not increased during the 5-year period. Thigh muscle injury is the most common injury at top level with an injury incidence of 1.6/1000 hours of exposure, which means that a team can expect 10 such injuries each season. The risk of ankle sprain has been reduced by 50%, probably due to the thorough knowledge in top-level teams about optimal treatment and prevention. A correlation has been found between major injuries (causing absence > 4 weeks) and performance. There is a considerable variation in the number of matches played per season in European professional leagues. Top level players are obliged to play many matches, especially during the final period of the season. A correlation was found between many matches at the end of a season and an increased injury risk and/or underperformance during subsequent world tournaments ConclusionThe injury risk has not increased in male professional football during recent years. At elite level, the risk of ankle sprain has been lowered and thigh muscle strain is the most common injury. A period with a congested match calendar can lead to fatigue, increasing the risk of injury and poor performance during the following period.

show abstract

“…Con las generaciones venideras de fibras de césped artificial, con mayor nivel de lubricación de la fibra, hacen que la abrasión que produce este pavimento se vaya disminuyendo. Así, estudios similares (Ekstrand, Timpka & Hägglund, 2006;FIFA, 2006;2007b;Fuller et al, 2007;Steffen et al, 2007) han demostrado que las nuevas generaciones de césped artificial no producen significativamente más lesiones por abrasión de la piel que el césped natural. Esta tendencia de señalar al pavimento sintético como una superficie abrasiva irá cambiando a medida que los actuales pavimentos artificiales se vayan sustituyendo por otros más modernos.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Satisfacción de entrenadores y deportistas con los campos de fútbol de césped natural y artificial. (Trainers and Players Satisfaction in the Grass and Artificial Turf Football Fields)

Gallardo¹,

Felipe²,

Burillo³

et al. 2010

CCD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumenEn los últimos años, la demanda de práctica deportiva en campos de fútbol de césped artificial y natural ha crecido exponencialmente. Así surge la necesidad de conocer cuál es el grado de satisfacción tanto de entrenadores como de deportistas sobre estos dos tipos de pavimentos deportivos. Esta investigación se basa en un estudio cuantitativo, a través de dos cuestionarios de satisfacción sobre estos pavimentos. La muestra del estudio la conforman 75 entrenadores y 368 deportistas, que realizan su actividad deportiva en campos de césped natural y artificial, de la Región de Murcia. Los resultados obtenidos muestran una preferencia de los agentes analizados por el césped artificial en gran parte de las variables, aunque la valoración general obtenida no presenta diferencias significativas. Aunque a medida que aumenta la categoría en la que participan los sujetos también aumenta su preferencia por la superficie natural.Palabras clave: césped natural, césped artificial, campos, entrenador, deportista, satisfacción. AbstractThe demand for sport practice in turf and grass football fields has suffered an exponential growth during last years. At this point it appears the requirement to know players and trainers satisfaction level about these two sports surfaces. This research is based on a quantitative study. Two question papers to measure the satisfaction level for the two surfaces are used. The sample is formed by 75 coaches and 368 players, that they play in grass and artificial turf football fields in the Region of Murcia. The results show a preference of agents for the artificial turf in most of the variables analyzed, although the overall assessment does not differ significantly between the two surfaces sports. However, the upper player's categories show priority for the grass fields as well.

show abstract

Risk of injury in elite football played on artificial turf versus natural grass: a prospective two-cohort study

Cited by 202 publications

References 15 publications

Can the natural turf pitch be viewed as a risk factor for injury within Association Football?

Can the natural turf pitch be viewed as a risk factor for injury within Association Football?

Epidemiology of football injuries

Satisfacción de entrenadores y deportistas con los campos de fútbol de césped natural y artificial. (Trainers and Players Satisfaction in the Grass and Artificial Turf Football Fields)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About