Table 5

Groin injury prevention: effect and grading the quality of evidence

OutcomesEffect size
LargeMediumSmallTrivial
Risk of injury
Meta-analyses RR (95% CI)
 Mixed groin prevention programmes versus usual care*; n=4191, male/female football72 0.81 (0.60 to 1.09); I2=7.0%Low quality of evidence
 Specific adductor strength training versus usual care*; n=1067, male football72 0.80 (0.53 to 1.22); I2=3.0%Low quality of evidence
 FIFA 11+ programme versus usual care*; n=2476, male/female football72 0.64 (0.27 to 1.49); I2=59.0%Very low quality of evidence
 FIFA 11+ programme versus to usual care*; n=3417, male/female football54 0.58 (0.40 to 0.84); I2=8.0%Low quality of evidence
 FIFA 11+ programme versus usual care*; n=3732, male/female from mixed sports78 79 0.58 (0.06 to 5.93); I2=62.0%Very low quality of evidence
Individual studies OR (95% CI)
 Adductor strengthening programme versus usual care; n=486, male football73 0.59 (0.40 to 0.86)Moderate quality of evidence
RR (95% CI)
 FIFA 11+ programme performed pre-football and post-football versus FIFA 11+ performed pre-football; n=280, male football62 0.16 (0.02 to 1.29)Very low quality of evidence
 Modified FIFA 11+ with rescheduling of Part 2 versus standard FIFA 11+; n=806, male football64 1.19 (0.81 to 1.76)Moderate quality of evidence
  • *Based on pooled data from meta-analysis. RR (risk ratio) ORs; I2 (heterogeneity in study results); the preventive effect is assessed as RR assessed as trivial (RR >0.78), small (0.78≥ RR >0.61), medium (0.61≥ RR >0.47) and large (RR ≤0.47).47