Article Text
Abstract
Objective To analyse the relationship between the implementation of ‘the 11’ protocol during the regular season in a men’s amateur soccer team and the rate of hamstring and lateral ankle ligament (LAL) injuries, and to estimate the clinical benefit of the programme according to the type of injury and the position field.
Methods This cohort study was conducted in two different men’s amateur soccer teams. During two seasons, the exposed group (43 players) performed ‘the 11’ protocol twice a week, and the unexposed group (43 players) performed the regular training programme. All players trained three times per week for 1.5 hours per day. Data collection was performed for every 1000 hours of play.
Results 18 hamstring injuries (injury rate (IR) of 2.26 injuries/1000 training+competition hours) and 15 LAL injuries (IR of 1.88 injuries/1000) were registered in the exposed group. In the unexposed group, there were 25 LAL injuries (IR of 3.14 injuries/1000) and 35 hamstring injuries (IR of 4.39 injuries/1000). The number needed to treat to prevent one new case was 3.9 in LAL injuries, 3.31 in biceps femoris injuries and 10.7 in recurrent hamstring injuries.
Conclusions ‘The 11’ programme reduced the incidence of hamstring and LAL injuries in amateur players. According to the field position, the programme was effective for defenders and midfielders. In accordance with the type of injury, the exposed group had a lower risk of LAL, biceps femoris and hamstring injuries compared with those in the unexposed group.
- primary prevention
- athletic Injuries
- lower extremity
- sports medicine
- football
- soccer
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors RN-G conceptualised and designed the study, coordinated and supervised data collection, drafted the initial manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. CC-M conceptualised and designed the study, drafted the initial manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. MRA-G coordinated and supervised data collection, critically reviewed the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted. DO-B, VFG-G and AL-P carried out the initial analyses, reviewed and revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Obtained.
Ethics approval Miguel Hernandez University Review Board.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data sharing statement All availabe data from the study are reported in the submitted manuscript.
Correction notice This paper has been amended since it was published Online First. Owing to a scripting error, some of the publisher names in the references were replaced with ’BMJ Publishing Group'. This only affected the full text version, not the PDF. We have since corrected these errors and the correct publishers have been inserted into the references.