Incidence of football injuries sustained on artificial turf compared to grass and other playing surfaces: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Kuitunen I, Immonen V, Pakarinen O, Mattila VM, Ponkilainen VT
EClinicalMedicine · 16 citas
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Metaanálisis (clasificado por nuestro filtro de IA)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Eventos clínicos como enfermedad o muerte
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Financiación independiente
Según la declaración de financiación del texto completo.
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2023-04-13 · EClinicalMedicine · vol. 59 · pág. 101956
- Editorial
- Elsevier BV
- Citado
- 26 citas · más que el 82% de estudios similares · 1.7× el promedio de su campo
- Referencias
- 38 trabajos
- Acceso
- Acceso abierto (revista) · CC-BY
- Áreas de investigación
- Sports injuries and prevention · Cardiovascular Effects of Exercise · Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
- Palabras clave
- Medicine, Incidence (geometry), Meta-analysis, Football, Rate ratio, Observational study, Poison control, Confounding, Confidence interval, Injury prevention, Demography, Physical therapy, Emergency medicine, Internal medicine
5 autores
- Ilari Kuitunen🇫🇮University of Eastern Finland; Kuopio University Hospital
- Ville Immonen
- Oskari Pakarinen🇫🇮Tampere University
- Ville Matti Mattila🇫🇮Tampere University; Tampere University Hospital; Tampere University
- Ville Ponkilainen🇫🇮Central Finland Health Care District
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Background
Prior reviews have not conducted statistical synthesis of injury incidence on artificial turf in football. To analyse and compare the incidence of injuries sustained playing football (soccer) on artificial turf compared to grass and other playing surfaces.
Methods
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases in October 2022 without filters. All observational studies (prospective or retrospective) that analysed injuries sustained playing football on artificial turf and which included a control group that played on grass or other surface were included. Studies were included if they reported the number of injuries and the exposure time for the playing surfaces. Risk of bias was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random effects model was used to calculate the pooled incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals. Protocol was registered with PROSPERO on October 30th, 2022. Registration number: CRD42022371414.
Findings
We screened 1447 studies, and evaluated 67 full reports, and finally included 22 studies. Risk of bias was a notable issue, as only 5 of the 22 studies adjusted their analysis for potential confounders. Men (11 studies: IRR 0.82, CI 0.72-0.94) and women (5 studies: IRR 0.83, CI 0.76-0.91) had lower injury incidence on artificial turf. Professional players had a lower incidence of injury (8 studies: IRR 0.79, CI 0.70-0.90) on artificial turf, whereas there was no evidence of differences in the incidence of injury in amateur players (8 studies: IRR 0.91, CI 0.77-1.09). The incidence of pelvis/thigh (10 studies: IRR 0.72, CI 0.57-0.90), and knee injuries (14 studies: IRR 0.77, CI 0.64-0.92) were lower on artificial turf.
Interpretation
The overall incidence of football injuries is lower on artificial turf than on grass. Based on these findings, the risk of injury can't be used as an argument against artificial turf when considering the optimal playing surface for football.
Funding
No specific funding was received for this study.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial (CC BY).
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.