Table 1

Key findings since publication of our previous systematic review

Study and designParticipantsInterventionsMain outcomes
Rate ratio (95% CI)
Emery & Meeuwisse4
Cluster RCT
885 indoor soccer players (44% male)
13–18 years
‘Neuromuscular prevention strategy plus home-based balance training’ versus ‘standardised warm-up (stretching and aerobic components plus home-based stretching programme’All injuries: 0.62 (0.39 to 0.99)
Acute-onset injury: 0.62 (0.39 to 0.99)
Lower extremity injury: 0.68 (0.42 to 1.11) n.s.
Ankle sprains: 0.5 (0.24 to 1.04) n.s.
Knee sprains: 0.38 (0.08 to 1.75) n.s.
Kiani7
Non-RCT
1506 female soccer players 13–19 years‘HarmoKnee preventive programme’ plus ‘education’ versus ‘regular training and warm-up’All knee injuries: 0.23 (0.04 to 0.83)
Non-contact knee injuries: 0.10 (0.00 to 0.70)
LaBella8
Cluster RCT
1492 female high school basketball and soccer players‘Neuromuscular warm-up’ versus ‘usual warm-up’Gradual-onset injuries: 0.35 (0.18 to 0.69)
Acute non-contact injuries: 0.44 (0.26 to 0.76)
Non-contact ankle sprains: 0.34 (0.14 to 0.81)
Soligard5
Cluster RCT
1892 female soccer players 13–17 years‘Comprehensive warm-up programme (11+)’ versus ‘warm up as usual’Lower extremity injuries: 0.71 (0.49 to 1.03) n.s.
Injuries overall: 0.68 (0.48 to 0.98)
Overuse injuries: 0.47 (0.26 to 0.85)
Sever injuries: 0.55 (0.36 to 0.83)
Waldén6
Cluster RCT
4564 female soccer players 12–17 years‘Neuromuscular warm-up programme’ versus ‘train and play as usual’ACL injury: 0.36 (0.15 to 0.85)
  • ACL, anterior cruciate ligament; n.s., not significant; RCT, randomised controlled trial.