Incidence, mechanisms, and severity of game-related college football injuries on FieldTurf versus natural grass: a 3-year prospective study
Meyers MC
The American journal of sports medicine · 58 citas
Etiquetas de revisión
Financiación no declaradaDatos neutrales que nuestra revisión registró sobre cómo se hizo este estudio. Describen el método, nunca si nos gusta el resultado.
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Estudio de cohortes (indexado por PubMed)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Eventos clínicos como enfermedad o muerte
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Financiación no declarada
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2010-01-14 · Am J Sports Med · vol. 38 · número 4 · págs. 687–697
- Editorial
- SAGE Publishing
- Citado
- 111 citas · más que el 98% de estudios similares · 7.0× el promedio de su campo
- Impacto
- Entre el 10 % más citado de su campo
- Referencias
- 67 trabajos
- Acceso
- De pago
- Áreas de investigación
- Sports injuries and prevention · Turfgrass Adaptation and Management · Tendon Structure and Treatment
- Palabras clave
- Incidence (geometry), Football, Athletes, Medicine, Confidence interval, Injury prevention, Poison control, Team sport, Demography, Physical therapy, Emergency medicine, Internal medicine, Geography, Mathematics
- MeSH
- humans, poaceae, craniocerebral trauma, athletic injuries, ankle injuries, knee injuries, trauma severity indices, incidence, cohort studies, prospective studies, surface properties, football, shoulder injuries
1 autor
- Michael C. Meyers🇺🇸 · autor de correspondenciaMontana State University
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Background
Numerous injuries have been attributed to playing on artificial turf. More recently, FieldTurf was developed to duplicate the playing characteristics of natural grass. No long-term studies have been conducted comparing game-related collegiate football injuries between the 2 playing surfaces.
Hypothesis
Collegiate athletes do not experience any difference in the incidence, mechanisms, and severity of game-related injuries between FieldTurf and natural grass.
Study design
Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.
Methods
Twenty-four universities were evaluated over 3 competitive seasons for injury incidence, injury category, time of injury, injury time loss, player position, injury mechanism, primary type of injury, grade and anatomical location of injury, type of tissue injured, trauma (head, knee, and shoulder), and environmental factors.
Results
In sum, 465 collegiate games were evaluated for game-related football injuries sustained on FieldTurf or natural grass during 3 seasons. Overall, 230 team games (49.5%) were played on FieldTurf versus 235 team games (50.5%) played on natural grass. A total of 2253 injuries were documented, with 1050 (46.6%) occurring during play on FieldTurf, and 1203 (53.4%) on natural grass. Multivariate analysis per 10 team games indicated significantly lower total injury incidence rates, F(3, 2249) = 3.468, P = .016, n - beta = 0.778, on FieldTurf, 45.7 (95% confidence interval [CI], 44.2-46.3), versus natural grass, 51.2 (95% CI, 49.8-51.7). Significantly lower minor injury incidence rates, 38.0 (95% CI, 36.9-38.5) versus 39.9 (95% CI, 39.1-40.0, P = .001), substantial injury incidence rates, 5.0 (95% CI, 4.3-5.6) versus 7.2 (95% CI, 6.6-7.7, P = .020), and severe injury incidence rates, 2.7 (95% CI, 2.1-3.3) versus 4.1 (95% CI, 3.5-4.1; P = .049), were documented on FieldTurf versus natural grass, respectively. Multivariate analyses also indicated significantly less trauma on FieldTurf when comparing injury time loss, injury situation, grade of injury, injuries under various field conditions, and temperature. No significant differences in head, knee, or shoulder trauma were observed between playing surfaces.
Conclusion
FieldTurf is in many cases safer than natural grass. It must be reiterated, however, that the findings of this study may be generalizable to only this level of competition. Because this study is still in the early stages, investigation is ongoing.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial.
Confianza de la comunidad
Cargando…
¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?
Comentarios
¿Algo está mal aquí?
Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.
Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.