The Dose–Response Relationship of an Exercise‐Based Injury Prevention Program: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial on Athletics (Track‐and‐Field) Athletes Over a 39‐Week Follow‐Up

Despite exercise-based injury prevention programs (EIPPs) being widely researched and used, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have failed to show their protective effect on injury risk. This is potentially due to underappreciating the EIPP dose-response relationship, by not controlling the analysis for the injuries sustained during the early EIPP implementation period, before the EIPP becomes efficacious. To determine the dose-response relationship of EIPP by controlling for the effects of injuries sustained before it became efficacious. We conducted a secondary analysis of an RCT analyzing the EIPP efficacy in athletics over a 39-week follow-up on 840 athletes, by including only those with 100% response rate. We controlled the statistical analyses for a range of lengths of early EIPP implementation period by either excluding the athletes with early injuries (i.e., exclusion approach) or adjusting for the early injuries' effects (i.e., inclusion approach). We estimated the EIPP's dose-response relationship by measuring the EIPP's effect at each length of the controlled period. When we considered no early controlled period, the EIPP showed no effect (OR = 0.85 [95% CI: 0.67-1.09]; p = 0.209). However, both exclusion and inclusion approaches showed that the EIPP effect increased significantly after 5-6 weeks of controlled period. This relationship plateaued at 7-12 weeks of controlled period, peaking at 10 weeks with the exclusion approach (OR = 0.28 [95% CI: 0.16-0.48]; p < 0.001), and 7 weeks with the inclusion approach (OR = 0.37 [95% CI: 0.25-0.55]; p < 0.001). Acknowledging the dose-response relationship of EIPPs could help researchers to design and analyze RCTs and practitioners to plan EIPP implementation timely. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03307434.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports
Published
2024-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.14720
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Sports injuries and prevention
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.39

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Dose–Response Relationship of an Exercise‐Based Injury Prevention Program: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial on Athletics (Track‐and‐Field) Athletes Over a 39‐Week Follow‐Up

Spyridon Iatropoulos, Pierre‐Eddy Dandrieux, Pascal Édouard, David Blanco et al.
5 citations
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports
Sports injuries and prevention
2.39
article

The Dose–Response Relationship of an Exercise‐Based Injury Prevention Program: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial on Athletics (Track‐and‐Field) Athletes Over a 39‐Week Follow‐Up

Spyridon Iatropoulos, Pierre‐Eddy Dandrieux, Pascal Édouard, David Blanco, Laurent Navarro
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Despite exercise-based injury prevention programs (EIPPs) being widely researched and used, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have failed to show their protective effect on injury risk. This is potentially due to underappreciating the EIPP dose-response relationship, by not controlling the analysis for the injuries sustained during the early EIPP implementation period, before the EIPP becomes efficacious. To determine the dose-response relationship of EIPP by controlling for the effects of injuries sustained before it became efficacious. We conducted a secondary analysis of an RCT analyzing the EIPP efficacy in athletics over a 39-week follow-up on 840 athletes, by including only those with 100% response rate. We controlled the statistical analyses for a range of lengths of early EIPP implementation period by either excluding the athletes with early injuries (i.e., exclusion approach) or adjusting for the early injuries' effects (i.e., inclusion approach). We estimated the EIPP's dose-response relationship by measuring the EIPP's effect at each length of the controlled period. When we considered no early controlled period, the EIPP showed no effect (OR = 0.85 [95% CI: 0.67-1.09]; p = 0.209). However, both exclusion and inclusion approaches showed that the EIPP effect increased significantly after 5-6 weeks of controlled period. This relationship plateaued at 7-12 weeks of controlled period, peaking at 10 weeks with the exclusion approach (OR = 0.28 [95% CI: 0.16-0.48]; p < 0.001), and 7 weeks with the inclusion approach (OR = 0.37 [95% CI: 0.25-0.55]; p < 0.001). Acknowledging the dose-response relationship of EIPPs could help researchers to design and analyze RCTs and practitioners to plan EIPP implementation timely. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03307434.

Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in SportsVol. 34(9)
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (FR), Inserm (FR), Mines Saint-Étienne (FR), Universitat Internacional de Catalunya (ES), MSH Medical School Hamburg – University of Applied Sciences and Medical University (DE), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Étienne (FR), Université Savoie Mont Blanc (FR), Université Jean Monnet (FR)
Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, Agencia Estatal de Investigación
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Sports injuries and prevention
2.39
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.