A Meta-Analysis of Soccer Injuries on Artificial Turf and Natural Grass
Williams JH, Akogyrem E, Williams JR
Journal of sports medicine (Hindawi Publishing Corporation) · 7 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Meta-analysis (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Clinical events such as disease or death
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2013-01-01 · J Sports Med (Hindawi Publ Corp) · vol. 2013 · pp. 1–6
- Publisher
- Hindawi Publishing Corporation
- Cited
- 23 citations · more than 25% of similar papers · 0.1× the field average
- References
- 24 works
- Access
- Open access (hybrid journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Sports injuries and prevention · Injury Epidemiology and Prevention · Sports Performance and Training
- Keywords
- Incidence (geometry), Mathematics, Animal science, Medicine, Demography, Biology, Geometry
5 authors
From US
- Jay H. WilliamsVirginia Tech
- Jay H. Williams · correspondingVirginia Tech
- Emmanuel AkogyremVirginia Tech
- Jeremy R. WilliamsVirginia Tech
- Jeremy R. Williams · correspondingVirginia Tech
Abstract
The goal of this investigation was to determine if playing or training on third-generation artificial turf (AT) surfaces increases the incidence rate of injuries compared to natural grass (NG) surfaces. This was accomplished by a meta-analysis performed on previously published research. Eight studies met the criteria of competitive soccer players, participation on both surfaces, and presentation of both exposure time and injury occurrence. Exposure time and injury incidence values were used to generate injury rate ratios (IRRs, AT/NG) for all injuries as well as specific injuries. Subgroup analyses were also performed by condition (match or training), gender, and age (youth or adult). The overall IRR was 0.86 (P < 0.05) suggesting a lower injury risk on AT than NG. However, there was considerable heterogeneity between studies. Analyses of individual injuries and subgroups found that in many cases IRR values were significantly less than 1.0. In no case was the IRR significantly greater than 1.0. Based on this, it appears that the risk of sustaining an injury on AT under some conditions might be lowered compared to NG. However, until more is known about how issues such as altered playing styles affect injury incidence, it is difficult to make firm conclusions regarding the influence of AT on player safety.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.