You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Original article
Training loads and injury risk in Australian football—differing acute: chronic workload ratios influence match injury risk
  1. David L Carey1,
  2. Peter Blanch1,2,3,
  3. Kok-Leong Ong4,
  4. Kay M Crossley1,
  5. Justin Crow1,2,
  6. Meg E Morris1
  1. 1 La Trobe Sport and Exercise Medicine Research Centre, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  2. 2 Essendon Football Club, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  3. 3 School of Allied Health Sciences, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
  4. 4 SAS Analytics Innovation Lab, La Trobe Business School, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Professor Kay M Crossley, La Trobe Sport and Exercise Medicine Research Centre, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Plenty Road & Kingsbury Drive, Melbourne, Victoria 3086, Australia; k.crossley{at}latrobe.edu.au

Abstract

Aims (1) To investigate whether a daily acute:chronic workload ratio informs injury risk in Australian football players; (2) to identify which combination of workload variable, acute and chronic time window best explains injury likelihood.

Methods Workload and injury data were collected from 53 athletes over 2 seasons in a professional Australian football club. Acute:chronic workload ratios were calculated daily for each athlete, and modelled against non-contact injury likelihood using a quadratic relationship. 6 workload variables, 8 acute time windows (2–9 days) and 7 chronic time windows (14–35 days) were considered (336 combinations). Each parameter combination was compared for injury likelihood fit (using R2).

Results The ratio of moderate speed running workload (18–24 km/h) in the previous 3 days (acute time window) compared with the previous 21 days (chronic time window) best explained the injury likelihood in matches (R2=0.79) and in the immediate 2 or 5 days following matches (R2=0.76–0.82). The 3:21 acute:chronic workload ratio discriminated between high-risk and low-risk athletes (relative risk=1.98–2.43). Using the previous 6 days to calculate the acute workload time window yielded similar results. The choice of acute time window significantly influenced model performance and appeared to reflect the competition and training schedule.

Conclusions Daily workload ratios can inform injury risk in Australian football. Clinicians and conditioning coaches should consider the sport-specific schedule of competition and training when choosing acute and chronic time windows. For Australian football, the ratio of moderate speed running in a 3-day or 6-day acute time window and a 21-day chronic time window best explained injury risk.

  • Injury prevention
  • Australian football
  • Training load

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2016-096309

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Twitter Follow David Carey at @dlcarey88

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Ethics approval La Trobe University Faculty of Health Sciences Human Ethics Committee (FHEC14/233).

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.