Abrasion injuries on artificial turf: A systematic review
Twomey DM, Petrass LA, Fleming P, Lenehan K
Journal of science and medicine in sport · 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
- Systematic review (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Clinical events such as disease or death
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2018-11-16 · J Sci Med Sport · vol. 22 · issue 5 · pp. 550–556
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Cited
- 19 citations · more than 34% of similar papers · 0.2× the field average
- References
- 51 works
- Access
- Open access (repository copy) · CC-BY-NC-ND
- Research areas
- Sports injuries and prevention · Shoulder Injury and Treatment · Sports Dynamics and Biomechanics
- Keywords
- Abrasion (mechanical), Scopus, Inclusion (mineral), Poison control, Injury prevention, Occupational safety and health, MEDLINE, Forensic engineering, Human factors and ergonomics, Physical therapy, Medicine, Psychology, Engineering, Environmental health, Mechanical engineering, Social psychology, Political science, Pathology
- MeSH
- humans, athletic injuries, soft tissue injuries, incidence, risk, floors and floorcoverings, sports equipment
4 authors
From AU, GB
- D. Twomey · correspondingFederation University
- Lauren A. PetrassFederation University
- Paul Richard FlemingLoughborough University
- Kurt A LenehanFederation University
Abstract
Objectives
To review the incidence of abrasion injuries sustained on artificial turf playing fields and the level of evidence existing on player perceptions of abrasion injuries on these surfaces.
Design
Systematic review.
Method
A systematic search was performed using SPORTDiscus, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus and Science Direct databases. Inclusion criteria included: abrasion type injuries measured; conducted on artificial/synthetic turf; type of sport reported; peer-reviewed original research; English language search terms, but no language restrictions. A quality assessment was conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality scale.
Results
The search yielded 76 potential articles, with 25 meeting all inclusion criteria. Twenty articles were injury-based and five were perception-based. The differences in injury definition and the lack of details of the playing surfaces produced varying results on the rate of injuries on artificial turf. Regardless of the condition of the surface, the level of play, or the sport, players perceived the fear of abrasion injuries as a major disadvantage of artificial turf surfaces.
Conclusions
The review highlighted the current disparity that exists between players' perceptions of abrasion injuries and the level of evidence of abrasion injury risk on artificial turf playing surfaces. There is a need for the inclusion of greater detail of playing surfaces' specifications and condition, and an injury definition sufficiently sensitive to better measure abrasion injury incidence and severity. Without this more detailed information, it is likely that the strongly perceived risk of abrasion injuries will continue as a barrier to the adoption of artificial playing surfaces.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
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.