The influence of playing surface on external demands and physiological responses during a soccer match simulation
Wundersitz DW, Staunton CA, Gordon BA, Kingsley MI
Journal of sports sciences · 1 citation
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
- Controlled clinical trial (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2021-09-17 · J Sports Sci · vol. 39 · issue 24 · pp. 2869–2877
- Publisher
- Taylor & Francis
- Cited
- 2 citations · more than 54% of similar papers · 0.4× the field average
- References
- 45 works
- Access
- Paywalled
- Research areas
- Sports Performance and Training · Sports injuries and prevention · Occupational Health and Performance
- Keywords
- Energy expenditure, Animal science, Heart rate, Chemistry, Environmental science, Medicine, Biology, Internal medicine
- MeSH
- humans, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, heart rate, soccer, angiotensin receptor antagonists, accelerometry
4 authors
From AU, SE, NZ
- Daniel William Taylor WundersitzLa Trobe University
- Craig A. StauntonMid Sweden University
- Brett Ashley GordonLa Trobe University
- Michael Kingsley · correspondingUniversity of Auckland; La Trobe University
Abstract
We investigated the effects of playing surfaces with different impact absorption characteristics on external demand and physiological responses. Fifteen participants completed a soccer match simulation on natural grass, synthetic turf and concrete surfaces. Accelerometry-derived PlayerLoadTM per minute (PL·min-1) and average net force (AvFNet) were used to quantify external demands at the centre of mass (CoM), upper-back, mid-back and hip. Heart rate, oxygen uptake, energy expenditure and RPE quantified physiological responses. The concrete surface exhibited the least impact absorption, with peak decelerations ~3.5x synthetic turf and ~10x natural grass (p 2p≤0.092). Both AvFNet and PL·min-1 (location: p 2p≥0.859) were higher at the hip (613(91)N; 12.5(1.2)arb.u), reduced at the mid-back (521(67)N; 8.8(0.7)arb.u) and upper-back (502(60)N; 8.8(0.7)arb.u) when compared to CoM (576(78)N; 10.7(1.0)arb.u). Although playing surface did not influence the external demands, heart rate or oxygen uptake (p > 0.05), energy expenditure was highest on natural grass compared to synthetic turf (P = 0.034) and RPE was highest on synthetic turf compared to concrete (p = 0.026). Different playing surfaces can alter physiological responses to soccer-specific activity even when the external demands are similar.
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.