|
Citation
|
O'Connor F, Thornton HR, Ritchie D, Anderson J, Bull L, Rigby A, Leonard Z, Stern S, Bartlett JD. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2019; ePub(ePub): 1-25. |
|
Affiliation
|
Institute for Health and Sport, Footscray Park, Ballarat Road, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. |
|
Abstract
|
PURPOSE: To examine the relationship between sprint workloads using relative vs absolute thresholds and lower-body soft-tissue and bone-stress injury incidence in professional Australian Rules Football (AF).
METHODS: Fifty-three professional AF athletes' noncontact soft-tissue and bone-stress lower-body injuries (N = 62) were recorded and sprint workloads were quantified over ~18 mo using GPS. Sprint volume (m) and exposures (n) were determined using 2 methods: absolute (>24.9 km·h-1) and relative (>75%, >80%, >85%, >90%, >95% of maximal velocity). Relationships between threshold methods and injury incidence were assessed using logistic generalized additive models. Incidence-rate ratios (IRR) and model performances' area under the curve (AUC) were reported.
RESULTS: Mean ±SD maximal velocity for the group was 31.5 ±1.4, range 28.6-34.9 km.h-1. In comparing relative and absolute thresholds, 75% maximal velocity equated to ~1.5 km·h-1 below the absolute speed threshold, while 80% and 85% maximal velocity were 0.1 km·h-1 and 1.7 km·h-1 above the absolute speed threshold, respectively. Model AUC ranged from 0.48 to 0.61. Very low and very high cumulative sprint loads >80% across a 4-wk period, when measured relatively, resulted in higher IRR (2.54-3.29), than absolute thresholds (1.18-1.58).
DISCUSSION: Monitoring sprinting volume relative to an athlete's maximal velocity should be incorporated into athlete-monitoring systems. Specifically, quantifying the distance covered at >80% maximal velocity will ensure greater accuracy in determining sprint workloads and associated injury risk.
Keywords: Australian Football
Language: en |