Table 1

Systematic review demographics and methods

Author(s) and journalObjectiveStudy typePopulationCohortsPrimary/secondary outcomes
LaPrade et al,4 Am J Sports Med, 1995To assess the effects of wearing a face mask on facial lacerations and head and neck injuriesProspective cohort observational studyNCAA division 1 varsity ice hockey team, 798.5 practice hours and 163 games observedMandatory face shields versus historical NFS cohortPrimary: Facial laceration (lacerations requiring suturing) incidence rate
Secondary: Head and neck injury (an event that caused the player to miss the next practice or game) incidence rate
Benson et al,13 JAMA, 1999To determine the risk of head and neck injuries in players with FFS versus HFSProspective cohortCollegiate level male ice hockey players, 642 total athletes (mean age 22 years)FFS versus HFSPrimary: Reportable injury incidence (any event requiring assessment or treatment by a team therapist or physician or any mild traumatic brain injury or brachial plexus stretch)
Benson et al,14 Br J Sports Med, 2002To identify specific risk factors associated with increased concussion severityProspective cohortCollegiate level male ice hockey players, 642 total athletes (mean age 22 years)FFS versus HFSPrimary: Concussion incidence (any traumatic brain injury that required assessment or treatment by a team therapist or physician regardless of playing time lost)
Secondary: Playing time lost per concussion
Stuart et al,3 Am J Sports Med, 2002To examine the relationship between injury and type of facial protection and to characterise these injuriesProspective cohortElite amateur male ice hockey players, 282 total athletes (16–21 years of age)FFP versus PFP versus NFPPrimary: Injury incidence rate
Secondary: Concussion incidence rate and injury specific variables (type, anatomical location, diagnosis, mechanism of injury, perceived intent to injure and penalties called)
Stevens et al,10 J Sci Med Sport, 2006To determine the impact of face visors on concussion, head injury and eye injury ratesProspective cohort observational studyUS Hockey League junior A (elite amateur) male ice hockey players, 282 total athletes (16–21 years of age)FFP versus PFP versus NFPPrimary: Concussion incidence
Secondary: Non-concussion head injury and eye injury rates (injury that resulted in at least one missed game and did not include minor facial injuries such as lacerations)
Bunn,15 Phys Sportsmed, 2008To identify the effectiveness of half-visors based on the severity, location and mechanism of upper-half facial injuriesRetrospective cohortEast Coast Hockey League male ice hockey players, 186 total athletesHFS versus NFSPrimary: ISS for injuries to the upper half of the face
Secondary: Mechanism and location of injury to the upper half of the face
  • FFP, full facial protection; FFS, full face shield; HFS, half face shield; ISS, injury severity score; NCAA, National Collegiate Athletic Association; NFP, no facial protection; NFS, no face shield; PFP, partial facial protection.