You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 51, Issue 7
  • Yes, rolling averages are a good way to assess training load for injury prevention. Is there a better way? Probably, but we have not seen the evidence

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Letter
Yes, rolling averages are a good way to assess training load for injury prevention. Is there a better way? Probably, but we have not seen the evidence
  1. M K Drew1,2,3,
  2. P Blanch4,5,
  3. C Purdam1,2,3,
  4. T J Gabbett6
  1. 1Department of Physical Therapies, Australian Institute of Sport, Canberra, Australia
  2. 2Australian Collaboration for Research into Injury in Sport and its Prevention (ACRISP), Federation University Australia, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia
  3. 3Department of Physiotherapy, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia
  4. 4Essendon Football Club, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  5. 5School of Health Sciences, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia
  6. 6Gabbett Performance Solutions, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  1. Correspondence to M K Drew, Senior Sports Physiotherapist, Physical Therapies, Australian Institute of Sport, Australian Sports Commission, Canberra 2617, Australia; michael.drew{at}ausport.gov.au

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2016-096609

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.

    The acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) is evidence based1 ,2 and is strongly supported by the available literature.3 Other models of injury risk have yet to show such support.

    We find …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Twitter Follow Michael Drew @_mickdrew

    • Competing interests None declared.

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

    Linked Articles