An injury audit in high-level male youth soccer players from English, Spanish, Uruguayan and Brazilian academies

Hall, Elliott; Larruskain, Jon; Gil, Susana María; Lekue, José António; Baumert, Philipp; Rienzi, Edgardo; Moreno, Sacha; Tannure, Márcio; Murtagh, Conall F.; Ade, Jack; Squires, Paul E.; Orme, Patrick; Anderson, Liam; Whitworth-Turner, Craig; Morton, James P.; Drust, Barry; Williams, Alun G.; Erskine, Robert M.

doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2020.04.033

Cited by 32 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…32 However, the percentage of severe injuries that we found was lower than the 29% reported in other academies in Europe and South America. 11,25 Le Gall et al 32 reported a significantly higher incidence of severe injury in late maturers compared with early maturers. This is in contrast with our study, in which mature players had more severe injuries compared with normal and early maturers.…”

Section: "Mature" When Considering Maturity Statusmentioning

confidence: 98%

Association of Skeletal Maturity and Injury Risk in Elite Youth Soccer Players: A 4-Season Prospective Study With Survival Analysis

Materne

Chamari

Farooq

et al. 2021

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The association between injury risk and skeletal maturity in youth soccer has received little attention. Purpose: To prospectively investigate injury patterns and incidence in relation to skeletal maturity in elite youth academy soccer players and to determine the injury risks associated with the skeletal maturity status, both overall and to the lower limb apophysis. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: All injuries that required medical attention and led to time loss were recorded prospectively during 4 consecutive seasons in 283 unique soccer players from U-13 (12 years of age) to U-19 (18 years). The skeletal age (SA) was assessed in 454 player-seasons using the Fels method, and skeletal maturity status (SA minus chronological age) was classified as follows: late, SA >1 year behind chronological age; normal, SA ±1 year of chronological age; early, SA >1 year ahead of chronological age; and mature, SA = 18 years. An adjusted Cox regression model was used to analyze the injury risk. Results: A total of 1565 injuries were recorded; 60% were time-loss injuries, resulting in 17,772 days lost. Adjusted injury-free survival analysis showed a significantly greater hazard ratio (HR) for different status of skeletal maturity: early vs normal (HR = 1.26 [95% CI, 1.11-1.42]; P < .001) and early vs mature (HR = 1.35 [95% CI, 1.17-1.56]; P < .001). Players who were skeletally mature at the wrist had a substantially decreased risk of lower extremity apophyseal injuries (by 45%-61%) compared with late ( P < .05), normal ( P < .05), and early ( P < .001) maturers. Conclusion: Musculoskeletal injury patterns and injury risks varied depending on the players’ skeletal maturity status. Early maturers had the greatest overall adjusted injury risk. Players who were already skeletally mature at the wrist had the lowest risk of lower extremity apophyseal injuries but were still vulnerable for hip and pelvis apophyseal injuries.

show abstract

Section: "Mature" When Considering Maturity Statusmentioning

confidence: 98%

Association of Skeletal Maturity and Injury Risk in Elite Youth Soccer Players: A 4-Season Prospective Study With Survival Analysis

Materne

Chamari

Farooq

et al. 2021

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In football academies, the overall prevalence of time-loss growth-related injuries has previously been quantified between 4.5% and 14%, giving an incidence per squad-season ranging from 0.4 to 4.7 injuries. [11][12][13]15,16 Direct comparisons are difficult, as neither physis, epiphysis injuries nor diagnosis has been considered specifically. 9,15,16 The overall higher prevalence and injury incidence of physeal injuries in our study, compared to the existing literature, might highlight the bias due to not including these in previous injury surveillance systems.…”

Section: Physeal Injury Prevalence and Incidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…[11][12][13]15,16 Direct comparisons are difficult, as neither physis, epiphysis injuries nor diagnosis has been considered specifically. 9,15,16 The overall higher prevalence and injury incidence of physeal injuries in our study, compared to the existing literature, might highlight the bias due to not including these in previous injury surveillance systems. 8,19 It may also reflect the increase in youth football development intensification over the last decade and its association with a greater injury odds ratio and greater mechanical stress on the growth plate of the lower limbs.…”

Section: Physeal Injury Prevalence and Incidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…With regard to osteochondrosis, several authors have broadly reported the overall prevalence of such diseases as being between 4.5% and 14%, reporting predominantly Osgood-Schlatter and Sever's diseases. [11][12][13][14][15][16][17] Recently, growth plate injuries have been observed to be the second most prevalent time-loss injuries and 50% of all fractures involved the physis. 18 As the incidence and burden of specific physeal injuries in youth elite football are unknown, detailed prospective studies are essential.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Shedding light on incidence and burden of physeal injuries in a youth elite football academy: A 4‐season prospective study

Materne

Chamari

Farooq

et al. 2021

Scandinavian Med Sci Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Physeal injuries have been overlooked in epidemiological research in youth sports. Our prospective study investigated the incidence, severity, and burden of physeal injuries in a youth elite football academy. Methods:In total, 551 youth male football players from under-9 to under-19 were included and observed over four consecutive seasons. Injuries involving the physis were diagnosed and recorded according to type, location, and diagnosis.Injury incidence (II), severity (days lost), and injury burden (IB) were calculated per squad per season (25 players/squad).Results: There were 307 physeal injuries: 262 apophyseal (85%), 26 physeal (9%), 2 epiphyseal (1%), and 17 other physeal injuries (5%) with 80% (n=245) causing time-loss. The overall mean incidence of time-loss physeal injuries was 6 injuries/ squad-season, leading to a total of 157 days lost/squad-season. The U-16s had the highest burden with 444 days lost per squad-season [median: 20 (95%

show abstract

“…Examining the absolute (N) strength scores (Table 4) in isolation suggests that the stronger players at pre‐season went on to sustain injury. It is not a surprise given that 41% of all injuries occurred in oldest two cohorts 3,30 (Table 3) and these heavier players tended to have higher strength scores.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Strength development and non‐contact lower limb injury in academy footballers across age groups

Jones

Clair

Wrigley

et al. 2020

Scandinavian Med Sci Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non‐contact lower limb injuries are common in academy football. Yet, the impact these injuries have on strength development in academy footballers remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the impact of non‐contact lower limb injury on hip, groin, and knee flexor strength development in male academy youth footballers. Furthermore, this study: reports normative strength data of emerging field‐based tests that can be easily deployed in football academies; explores the effect of age on injury occurrence; and highlights the number of days lost from injury in male youth footballers. Assessments of hip adductor, abductor, and eccentric knee flexor strength were obtained from 195 academy football players during pre‐season and at the end of season. In‐season injuries were recorded by medical staff. Those footballers who sustained non‐contact lower limb injury were compared with those who did not sustain a non‐contact lower limb injury. No between‐group differences were observed for any strength assessments when controlled for pre‐season measures. Stronger footballers at pre‐season experienced strength loses, while those weaker players gained strength across the season. Hip strength development was impaired in older age group footballers. Sustaining a non‐contact lower limb injury had minimal impact on strength development. In the absence of in‐season lower limb strength monitoring, development in academy youth footballers may not progress as expected, and in particular, stronger and older youth athletes may benefit from individualized strength training.

show abstract

An injury audit in high-level male youth soccer players from English, Spanish, Uruguayan and Brazilian academies

Cited by 32 publications

References 32 publications

Association of Skeletal Maturity and Injury Risk in Elite Youth Soccer Players: A 4-Season Prospective Study With Survival Analysis

Association of Skeletal Maturity and Injury Risk in Elite Youth Soccer Players: A 4-Season Prospective Study With Survival Analysis

Shedding light on incidence and burden of physeal injuries in a youth elite football academy: A 4‐season prospective study

Strength development and non‐contact lower limb injury in academy footballers across age groups

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About