You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Original article
Effect of high-speed running on hamstring strain injury risk
  1. Steven Duhig1,
  2. Anthony J Shield1,
  3. David Opar2,
  4. Tim J Gabbett3,
  5. Cameron Ferguson4,
  6. Morgan Williams5
  1. 1School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences and Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  2. 2Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Exercise Science, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  3. 3School of Human Movement Studies, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  4. 4Gold Coast Suns Australian Football Club, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
  5. 5Faculty of Life Sciences and Education, University of South Wales, Wales, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Anthony J Shield, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences and Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, O Block, Room O-D611, Kelvin Grove, Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, QLD 4059, Australia; aj.shield{at}qut.edu.au

Abstract

Background Hamstring strain injuries (HSIs) are common within the Australian Football League (AFL) with most occurring during high-speed running (HSR). Therefore, this study investigated possible relationships between mean session running distances, session ratings of perceived exertion (s-RPE) and HSIs within AFL footballers.

Methods Global positioning system (GPS)-derived running distances and s-RPE for all matches and training sessions over two AFL seasons were obtained from one AFL team. All HSIs were documented and each player's running distances and s-RPE were standardised to their 2-yearly session average, then compared between injured and uninjured players in the 4 weeks (weeks −1, −2, −3 and −4) preceding each injury.

Results Higher than ‘typical’ (ie, z=0) HSR session means were associated with a greater likelihood of HSI (week −1: OR=6.44, 95% CI=2.99 to 14.41, p<0.001; summed weeks −1 and −2: OR=3.06, 95% CI=2.03 to 4.75, p<0.001; summed weeks −1, −2 and −3: OR=2.22, 95% CI=1.66 to 3.04, p<0.001; and summed weeks −1, −2, −3 and −4: OR=1.96, 95% CI=1.54 to 2.51, p<0.001). However, trivial differences were observed between injured and uninjured groups for standardised s-RPE, total distance travelled and distances covered whilst accelerating and decelerating. Increasing AFL experience was associated with a decreased HSI risk (OR=0.77, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.97, p=0.02). Furthermore, HSR data modelling indicated that reducing mean distances in week −1 may decrease the probability of HSI.

Conclusions Exposing players to large and rapid increases in HSR distances above their 2-yearly session average increased the odds of HSI. However, reducing HSR in week −1 may offset HSI risk.

  • Global positioning system
  • Training
  • Australian football
  • Sprinting

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2015-095679

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 Steven Duhig at @duhigs and Anthony Shield @das_shield

    • Contributors SD was the principal investigator and was involved with study design, recruitment, analysis and manuscript preparation. CF was involved with data collection and analysis. AJS, DO and MW were involved with the study design, analysis and manuscript preparation. TJG was involved with analysis and manuscript preparation. All authors had full access to all of the data (including statistical reports and tables) in the study and can take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Ethics approval Queensland University of Technology Research Ethics Committee.

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

    Linked Articles