Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Sports medicine highlights from other journals
  1. Ronan Kearney1,
  2. Christina Le2,
  3. Eoin Cunniffe3,
  4. Josh Heerey4
  1. 1 Irish College of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland
  2. 2 Glen Sather Sports Medicine Clinic, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  3. 3 Physiotherapist, Irish Society of Chartered Physiotherapists, Dublin, Ireland
  4. 4 La Trobe University Sports and Exercise Medicine Research Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Ronan Kearney, Irish College of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland; ronankearney{at}

Statistics from

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.

Female adolescent athletes’ attitudes and perspectives on injury prevention programs

Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 2017; 20: 146–151

Female athletes of all ages want to perform well and remain injury free. Injury prevention programs (IPP) are often promised as the panacea for athletes to remain injury free. However, the success of such programs requires athlete buy-in. In reality, do athletes view IPP as a way to prevent injury or just a way to keep the coach happy?

This study used a qualitative framework to explore adolescent female athletes’ perceptions of IPP. Interestingly, the athletes expressed they would undertake IPP if ‘data’ showed it reduced injuries. Additionally, external influences played very little role in athletes desire to undertake IPP, which is interesting given the assumed impact of status quo during adolescence. Lastly, athletes did not feel comfortable with their IPP being led by themselves, teammates or coaches.

So what are the keys to ensuring athlete buy-in to IPP in such …

View Full Text


  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.