4.0 Article

Implementation of an evidence-based injury prevention program in professional and semi-professional soccer

Journal

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1747954117707482

Keywords

Association football; coaches' knowledge; FIFA 11+program; Nordic hamstring exercise

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The ideal implementation of soccer injury prevention programs is essential knowledge for soccer coaches. The objective of this study was to investigate and compare the implementation of injury prevention programs, specially the FIFA 11+ program, among Australian and Saudi Arabian soccer coaches. A Web-based survey was used to obtain information regarding the coaches' implementation of injury prevention programs, the FIFA 11+ program, the Nordic hamstring exercise, pre- and post-training exercises. Sixty coaches30 from both selected countriesresponded to the survey (response rate=75%). In Australia, 93% of the coaches implemented an injury prevention program; while 73% implemented the FIFA 11+ program, only 51% implemented all the FIFA 11+ exercise components as recommended. In Saudi Arabia, 70% of the coaches stated that they followed an injury prevention program, but only 40% followed the FIFA 11+ program. However, 70% reported using all the FIFA 11+ exercise components in their current practices, which they may have adapted from different exercise-based injury prevention programs. The Australian coaches were significantly more likely to implement injury prevention programs (p=0.020) and the FIFA 11+ program (p=0.009). Nonetheless, no significant difference in the full implementation of the FIFA 11+ exercises components was found (p=0.114). The Australian coaches had greater awareness of injury prevention programs and more familiarity with the FIFA 11+ program than the Saudi Arabian coaches. Nevertheless, there was a gap between the coaches' knowledge and their actual practice.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available