The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Football Association Medical Research Programme: an audit of injuries in professional football—analysis of hamstring injuries
Open accessAbstract
Objective:To conduct a detailed analysis of hamstring injuries sustained in English professional football over two competitive seasons. Methods:Club medical staff at 91 professional football clubs annotated player injuries over two seasons. A specific injury audit questionnaire was used together with a weekly form that documented each clubs’ current injury status. Results:Completed injury records for the two competitive seasons were obtained from 87% and 76% of the participating clubs respectively. Hamstring strains accounted for 12% of the total injuries over the two seasons with nearly half (53%) involving the biceps femoris. An average of five hamstring strains per club per season was observed. A total of 13 116 days and 2029 matches were missed because of hamstring strains, giving an average of 90 days and 15 matches missed per club per season. In 57% of cases, the injury occurred during running. Hamstring strains were most often observed during matches (62%) with an increase at the end of each half (p<0.01). Groups of players sustaining higher than expected rates of hamstring injury were Premiership (p<0.01) and outfield players (p<0.01), players of black ethnic origin (p<0.05), and players in the older age groups (p<0.01). Only 5% of hamstring strains underwent some form of diagnostic investigation. The reinjury rate for hamstring injury was 12%. Conclusion:Hamstring strains are common in football. In trying to reduce the number of initial and recurrent hamstring strains in football, prevention of initial injury is paramount. If injury does occur, the importance of differential diagnosis followed by the management of all causes of posterior thigh pain is emphasised. Clinical reasoning with treatment based on best available evidence is recommended.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Hägglund, M., Waldén, M., Bahr, R., & Ekstrand, J. (2005) · British Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1136/bjsm.2005.018267 · Cited by 604
Greig, M. (2008) · The American Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1177/0363546508314413 · Cited by 187
Lovell, R., Midgley, A., Barrett, S., Carter, D., & Small, K. (2013) · Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2011.01353.x · Cited by 119
Medeiros, D. M., Marchiori, C., & Baroni, B. M. (2021) · Journal of Sport Rehabilitation · doi:10.1123/jsr.2019-0388 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Woods, C., Hawkins, R. D., Maltby, S., Hulse, M., Thomas, A., & Hodson, A.
- Venue
- British Journal of Sports Medicine
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2004-01-29
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 36-41
- ISSN
- 0306-3674 (ISSN-L)
- 1473-0480
- OpenAlex
- W2102905035
- Cited by
- 1,087
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 21.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.