You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 48, Issue 8
  • What do community football players think about different exercise-training programmes? Implications for the delivery of lower limb injury prevention programmes

Article Text

Article menu
XML
Original article
What do community football players think about different exercise-training programmes? Implications for the delivery of lower limb injury prevention programmes
  1. Caroline F Finch1,
  2. Tim LA Doyle2,3,
  3. Alasdair R Dempsey4,
  4. Bruce C Elliott3,
  5. Dara M Twomey5,
  6. Peta E White1,
  7. Kathy Diamantopoulou6,
  8. Warren Young5,
  9. David G Lloyd2,3
  1. 1Centre for Healthy and Safe Sport (CHASS) and the Australian Centre for Research into Injury in Sport and its Prevention (ACRISP), University of Ballarat, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia
  2. 2Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Griffith Health Institute, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
  3. 3School of Sport Science, Exercise and Health, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia
  4. 4School of Psychology and Exercise Science, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia
  5. 5School of Health Sciences, University of Ballarat, Mt Helen, Victoria, Australia
  6. 6Monash Injury Research Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Professor Caroline F Finch, Centre for Healthy and Safe Sport, University of Ballarat, Ballarat, VIC 3353, Australia; c.finch{at}ballarat.edu.au

Abstract

Background Players are the targeted end-users and beneficiaries of exercise-training programmes implemented during coach-led training sessions, and the success of programmes depends upon their active participation. Two variants of an exercise-training programme were incorporated into the regular training schedules of 40 community Australian Football teams, over two seasons. One variant replicated common training practices, while the second was an evidence-based programme to alter biomechanical and neuromuscular factors related to risk of knee injuries. This paper describes the structure of the implemented programmes and compares players’ end-of-season views about the programme variants.

Methods This study was nested within a larger group-clustered randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of two exercise-training programmes (control and neuromuscular control (NMC)) for preventing knee injuries. A post-season self-report survey, derived from Health Belief Model constructs, included questions to obtain players’ views about the benefits and physical challenges of the programme in which they participated.

Results Compared with control players, those who participated in the NMC programme found it to be less physically challenging but more enjoyable and potentially of more benefit. Suggestions from players about potential improvements to the training programme and its future implementation included reducing duration, increasing range of drills/exercises and promoting its injury prevention and other benefits to players.

Conclusions Players provide valuable feedback about the content and focus of implemented exercise-training programmes, that will directly inform the delivery of similar, or more successful, programmes in the future.

  • Implementation
  • Injury Prevention
  • Training

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-2013-092816

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

    Supplementary materials

    • Supplementary Data

      This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

      Files in this Data Supplement:

    Linked Articles