Effects of structural components of artificial turf on the transmission of impacts in football players

Encarnación-Martínez, Alberto; García-Gallart, Antonio; Gallardo, Andrés; Sánchez-Sáez, Juan Antonio; Sánchez-Sánchez, Javier

doi:10.1080/14763141.2017.1285347

Cited by 12 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A 12 minutes standard warm up was done before the running rhythms familiarization phase. Then, the participants tested the running rhythms established except the maximum speed run, until they felt comfortable with the conditions of the study 20 . Three repetitions for each speed in a randomized order was done within 20 m of the middle of the pitch.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Photoelectric cells (Microgate, Bolzano, Italy), positioned along 5 m in the middle of the 20 m pitch, was employed to control the speed. The accelerometer signal was registered during 5 s making this register coincide with running past the photocells to guarantee speed stability and avoid moments of initial acceleration and final deceleration of the test 20,50 . A ± 5% speed deviation was allowed during each speed condition.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, a good combination of structural components is decisive for the shock absorption of the impacts exerted by football players. Each strike of the foot with the ground produces an impact or shock, which is absorbed throughout the body from the foot to the head 20–22 . A limited dissipation of these impacts can produce suboptimal performances, overloads and injuries 23 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Influence of the structural components of artificial turf systems on impact attenuation in amateur football players

Sánchez-Sánchez

Guerrero

García-Gallart

et al. 2019

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this research was to evaluate the influence of the structural components of different 3rd generation artificial turf football field systems on the biomechanical response of impact attenuation in amateur football players. A total of 12 amateur football players (24.3 ± 3.7 years, 73.5 ± 5.5 kg, 178.3 ± 4.1 cm and 13.7 ± 4.3 years of sport experience) were evaluated on three third generation artificial turf systems (ATS) with different structural components. ATS were composed of asphalt sub-base and 45 mm of fibre height with (ATS1) and without (ATS2) elastic layer or compacted granular sub-base, 60 mm of fibre height without elastic layer (ATS3). Two triaxial accelerometers were firmly taped to the forehead and the distal end of the right tibia of each individual. The results reveal a higher force reduction on ATS3 in comparison to ATS1 (+6.24%, CI95%: 1.67 to 10.92, ES: 1.07; p < 0.05) and ATS2 (+21.08%, CI95%: 16.51 to 25.66, ES: 2.98; p < 0.05) elastic layer. Tibia acceleration rate was lower on ATS3 than ATS1 (−0.32, CI95%: −0.60 to −0.03, ES: 4.23; p < 0.05) and ATS2 (−0.35, CI95%: −0.64 to −0.06; ES: 4.69; p < 0.05) at 3.3 m/s. A very large correlation ( r = 0.7 to 0.9; p < 0.05) was found between energy restitution and fibre height in both head and tibial peak acceleration and stride time. In conclusion, structural components (fibre height, infill, sub-base and elastic layer) determine the mechanical properties of artificial turf fields. A higher force reduction and lower energy restitution diminished the impact received by the player which could protect against injuries associated with impacts compared to harder artificial turf surfaces.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of the structural components of artificial turf systems on impact attenuation in amateur football players

Sánchez-Sánchez

Guerrero

García-Gallart

et al. 2019

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, each variation of playing surface will having specific characteristics and mechanical properties, 3 with implications for mechanical loading and subsequent risk of injury. 4 Reviews of the literature have typically reported no difference in overall incidence rates between natural and artificial playing surfaces. 5,6 However, the incidence of ankle injuries has been associated with an increased risk on artificial surfaces.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Playing Surface on the Loading Response to Soccer-Specific Activity

Jones¹,

Page²,

Brogden³

et al. 2020

Journal of Sport Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: The influence of playing surface on injury risk in soccer is contentious, and contemporary technologies permit an in vivo assessment of mechanical loading on the player. Objective: To quantify the influence of playing surface on the PlayerLoad elicited during soccer-specific activity. Design: Repeated measures, field-based design. Setting: Regulation soccer pitches. Participants: Fifteen amateur soccer players (22.1 [2.4] y), injury free with ≥6 years competitive experience. Interventions: Each player completed randomized order trials of a soccer-specific field test on natural turf, astroturf, and third-generation artificial turf. GPS units were located at C7 and the mid-tibia of each leg to measure triaxial acceleration (100 Hz). Main Outcome Measures: Total accumulated PlayerLoad in each movement plane was calculated for each trial. Ratings of perceived exertion and visual analog scales assessing lower-limb muscle soreness were measured as markers of fatigue. Results: Analysis of variance revealed no significant main effect for playing surface on total PlayerLoad (P = .55), distance covered (P = .75), or postexercise measures of ratings of perceived exertion (P = .98) and visual analog scales (P = .61). There was a significant main effect for GPS location (P < .001), with lower total loading elicited at C7 than mid-tibia (P < .001), but with no difference between limbs (P = .70). There was no unit placement × surface interaction (P = .98). There was also a significant main effect for GPS location on the relative planar contributions to loading (P < .001). Relative planar contributions to loading in the anterioposterior:mediolateral:vertical planes was 25:27:48 at C7 and 34:32:34 at mid-tibia. Conclusions: PlayerLoad metrics suggest that playing surface does not influence mechanical loading during soccer-specific activity (not including tackling). Clinical reasoning should consider that PlayerLoad magnitude and axial contributions were sensitive to unit placement, highlighting opportunities in the objective monitoring of load during rehabilitation.

show abstract

“…Three surfaces are considered to reflect the evolution of artificial turf surfaces, and to acknowledge that each variation of playing surface will have specific characteristics and mechanical properties and, 21 in turn, specific mechanical responses and subsequent risk of injury. 22 In addition to the traditional C7 placement of the MEMS devices, mechanical loading will also be quantified at the mid-tibia (in order to prevent restriction of ankle joint function during the tasks) of both lower limbs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Soccer Playing Surface on the Loading Response to Ankle (P)Rehabilitation Exercises

Jones¹,

Brogden²,

Page³

et al. 2021

Journal of Sport Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Contemporary synthetic playing surfaces have been associated with an increased risk of ankle injury in the various types of football. Triaxial accelerometers facilitate in vivo assessment of planar mechanical loading on the player. Objective: To quantify the influence of playing surface on the PlayerLoad elicited during footwork and plyometric drills focused on the mechanism of ankle injury. Design: Repeated-measures, field-based design. Setting: Regulation soccer pitches. Participants: A total of 15 amateur soccer players (22.1 [2.4] y), injury free with ≥6 years competitive experience. Interventions: Each player completed a test battery comprising 3 footwork drills (anterior, lateral, and diagonal) and 4 plyometric drills (anterior hop, inversion hop, eversion hop, and diagonal hop) on natural turf (NT), third-generation artificial turf (3G), and AstroTurf. Global positioning system sensors were located at C7 and the mid-tibia of each leg to measure triaxial acceleration (100 Hz). Main Outcome Measures: PlayerLoad in each axial plane was calculated for each drill on each surface and at each global positioning system location. Results: Analysis of variance revealed a significant main effect for sensor location in all drills, with PlayerLoad higher at mid-tibia than at C7 in all movement planes. AstroTurf elicited significantly higher PlayerLoad in the mediolateral and anteroposterior planes, with typically no difference between NT and 3G. In isolated inversion and eversion hopping trials, the 3G surface also elicited lower PlayerLoad than NT. Conclusions: PlayerLoad magnitude was sensitive to unit placement, advocating measurement with greater anatomical relevance when using microelectromechanical systems technology to monitor training or rehabilitation load. AstroTurf elicited higher PlayerLoad across all planes and drills and should be avoided for rehabilitative purposes, whereas 3G elicited a similar mechanical response to NT.

show abstract

Effects of structural components of artificial turf on the transmission of impacts in football players

Cited by 12 publications

References 25 publications

Influence of the structural components of artificial turf systems on impact attenuation in amateur football players

Influence of the structural components of artificial turf systems on impact attenuation in amateur football players

The Influence of Playing Surface on the Loading Response to Soccer-Specific Activity

The Influence of Soccer Playing Surface on the Loading Response to Ankle (P)Rehabilitation Exercises

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About