TY - JOUR
T1 - Greater association of relative thresholds than absolute thresholds with noncontact lower-body injury in professional australian rules footballers: Implications for sprint monitoring
AU - O'Connor, Fergus
AU - Thornton, Heidi R.
AU - Ritchie, Dean
AU - Anderson, Jay
AU - Bull, Lindsay
AU - Rigby, Alex
AU - Leonard, Zane
AU - Stern, Steven
AU - Bartlett, Jonathan D.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Human Kinetics, Inc.
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - Sprint capacity is an important attribute for team-sport athletes, yet themost appropriate method to analyze it is unclear. Purpose: To examine the relationship between sprint workloads using relative versus absolute thresholds and lower-body soft-tissue and bone-stress injury incidence in professional Australian rules football. Methods: Fifty-three professional Australian rules football athletes' noncontact soft-tissue and bone-stress lower-body injuries (N = 62) were recorded, and sprint workloads were quantified over ∼18 months using the global positioning system. Sprint volume (m) and exposures (n) were determined using 2 methods: Absolute (>24.9 km h-1) and relative (≥75%,≥80%,≥85%,≥90%,≥95% of maximal velocity). Relationships between threshold methods and injury incidence were assessed using logistic generalized additive models. Incidence rate ratios and model performances' area under the curve were reported. Results: Mean (SD) maximal velocity for the group was 31.5 (1.4), range 28.6 to 34.9 km h-1. In comparing relative and absolute thresholds, 75% maximal velocity equated to ∼1.5 km h-1 below the absolute speed threshold, while 80% and 85% maximal velocity were 0.1 and 1.7 km h-1 above the absolute speed threshold, respectively. Model area under the curve ranged from 0.48 to 0.61. Very low and very high cumulative sprint loads≥80% across a 4-week period, when measured relatively, resulted in higher incidence rate ratios (2.54-3.29), than absolute thresholds (1.18-1.58). Discussion: Monitoring sprinting volume relative to an athlete'smaximal velocity should be incorporated into athlete monitoring systems. Specifically, quantifying the distance covered at >80% maximal velocity will ensure greater accuracy in determining sprint workloads and associated injury risk.
AB - Sprint capacity is an important attribute for team-sport athletes, yet themost appropriate method to analyze it is unclear. Purpose: To examine the relationship between sprint workloads using relative versus absolute thresholds and lower-body soft-tissue and bone-stress injury incidence in professional Australian rules football. Methods: Fifty-three professional Australian rules football athletes' noncontact soft-tissue and bone-stress lower-body injuries (N = 62) were recorded, and sprint workloads were quantified over ∼18 months using the global positioning system. Sprint volume (m) and exposures (n) were determined using 2 methods: Absolute (>24.9 km h-1) and relative (≥75%,≥80%,≥85%,≥90%,≥95% of maximal velocity). Relationships between threshold methods and injury incidence were assessed using logistic generalized additive models. Incidence rate ratios and model performances' area under the curve were reported. Results: Mean (SD) maximal velocity for the group was 31.5 (1.4), range 28.6 to 34.9 km h-1. In comparing relative and absolute thresholds, 75% maximal velocity equated to ∼1.5 km h-1 below the absolute speed threshold, while 80% and 85% maximal velocity were 0.1 and 1.7 km h-1 above the absolute speed threshold, respectively. Model area under the curve ranged from 0.48 to 0.61. Very low and very high cumulative sprint loads≥80% across a 4-week period, when measured relatively, resulted in higher incidence rate ratios (2.54-3.29), than absolute thresholds (1.18-1.58). Discussion: Monitoring sprinting volume relative to an athlete'smaximal velocity should be incorporated into athlete monitoring systems. Specifically, quantifying the distance covered at >80% maximal velocity will ensure greater accuracy in determining sprint workloads and associated injury risk.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85078978612&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1123/ijspp.2019-0015
DO - 10.1123/ijspp.2019-0015
M3 - Article
C2 - 31094252
AN - SCOPUS:85078978612
SN - 1555-0265
VL - 15
SP - 204
EP - 212
JO - International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
JF - International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance
IS - 2
ER -