Abstract
Background:
Preventive training programs (PTPs) reduce injury risk in youth athletes. Corrective verbal feedback is an integral component of PTP implementation; however, too many cues delivered at once may be too complicated for youth athletes. PTPs with simplified cues may be more effective as traditional PTPs to improve athlete injury risk.
Hypothesis/Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to evaluate changes in movements associated with injury risk youth athletes participating in a season-long PTP: with simplified feedback cues, with traditional feedback cues, or in a warm-up of the coaches’ choosing.
Methods:
A cluster-randomized controlled trial was utilized. Youth soccer teams were randomized into: simplified or traditional PTP, or the control group. Simplified and traditional PTPs were the same duration (10-15 minutes) with the same exercises, but the simplified PTP only provided sagittal plane feedback cues (e.g., “get low”) and the traditional PTP provided feedback in all planes of motion (e.g., “don’t let your knees cave inward”). Teams in the control group performed their coach’s warm-up.
Participants completed two test sessions (PRE-season, POST-season) with three trials of a jump-landing task evaluated using the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS). The LESS is a valid and reliable clinical movement assessment. Participants jumped off a 30-cm high box to a distance half their height and immediately rebounded straight in the air for maximum vertical height. A single, reliable rater graded all trials. Three trials were averaged together for one composite LESS score at each time point.
A generalized linear model was used to evaluate differences in composite LESS score between warm-up (Simplified, Traditional, Control) over time (PRE, POST) while controlling for team. All data were analyzed using SPSS Version 21.0 (p<0.05).
Results:
There were no significant differences between Simplified and Traditional PTPs (P>0.05) so the PTPs were combined into a single group (Intervention) and compared to Control from PRE to POST.
Four-hundred and twenty athletes (Intervention n=291 athletes, Control n=129 athletes) participated. The Intervention group improved LESS scores ((Mean±SE [95% CI]) Intervention PRE:6.32±0.17 [5.99,6.67], Intervention POST: 5.36±0.16 [5.05,5.69], Control PRE: 6.58±0.35 [5.94,7.30], Control POST: 6.09±0.34 [5.47,6.79])(P=.04).
Conclusion:
Regardless of PTP, athletes improved movement technique. These findings suggest that simplified corrective feedback is as effective as more complex feedback. Future studies should look to train coaches to focus on simplified cues and evaluate impact on PTP implementation.