The Association Between the Acute:Chronic Workload Ratio and Injury and its Application in Team Sports: A Systematic Review.
Journal
Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)
ISSN: 1179-2035
Titre abrégé: Sports Med
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 8412297
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2020
Mar 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
7
11
2019
medline:
2
4
2021
entrez:
7
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There has been a recent increase in research examining training load as a method of mitigating injury risk due to its known detrimental effects on player welfare and team performance. The acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) takes into account the current training load (acute) and the training load that an athlete has been prepared for (chronic). The ACWR can be calculated using; (1) the rolling average model (RA) and (2) the exponentially weighted moving average model (EWMA). The primary aim of this systematic review was to investigate the literature examining the association between the occurrence of injury and the ACWR and to investigate if sufficient evidence exists to determine the best method of application of the ACWR in team sports. Studies were identified through a comprehensive search of the following databases: EMBASE, Medline, SPORTDiscus, SCOPUS, AMED and CINAHL. Extensive data extraction was performed. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Cohort Studies. A total of 22 articles met the inclusion criteria. The assessment of article quality had an overall median NOS score of 8 (range 5-9). The findings of this review support the association between the ACWR and non-contact injuries and its use as a valuable tool for monitoring training load as part of a larger scale multifaceted monitoring system that includes other proven methods. There is support for both models, but the EWMA is the more suitable measure, in part due to its greater sensitivity. The most appropriate acute and chronic time periods, and training load variables, may be dependent on the specific sport and its structure. For practitioners, it is the important to understand the intricacies of the ACWR before deciding the best method of calculation. Future research needs to focus on the more sensitive EWMA model, for both sexes, across a larger range of sports and time frames and also combinations with other injury risk factors.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There has been a recent increase in research examining training load as a method of mitigating injury risk due to its known detrimental effects on player welfare and team performance. The acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) takes into account the current training load (acute) and the training load that an athlete has been prepared for (chronic). The ACWR can be calculated using; (1) the rolling average model (RA) and (2) the exponentially weighted moving average model (EWMA).
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The primary aim of this systematic review was to investigate the literature examining the association between the occurrence of injury and the ACWR and to investigate if sufficient evidence exists to determine the best method of application of the ACWR in team sports.
METHODS
METHODS
Studies were identified through a comprehensive search of the following databases: EMBASE, Medline, SPORTDiscus, SCOPUS, AMED and CINAHL. Extensive data extraction was performed. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Cohort Studies.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 22 articles met the inclusion criteria. The assessment of article quality had an overall median NOS score of 8 (range 5-9). The findings of this review support the association between the ACWR and non-contact injuries and its use as a valuable tool for monitoring training load as part of a larger scale multifaceted monitoring system that includes other proven methods. There is support for both models, but the EWMA is the more suitable measure, in part due to its greater sensitivity. The most appropriate acute and chronic time periods, and training load variables, may be dependent on the specific sport and its structure.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
For practitioners, it is the important to understand the intricacies of the ACWR before deciding the best method of calculation. Future research needs to focus on the more sensitive EWMA model, for both sexes, across a larger range of sports and time frames and also combinations with other injury risk factors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31691167
doi: 10.1007/s40279-019-01218-2
pii: 10.1007/s40279-019-01218-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
561-580Références
J Sci Med Sport. 2015 Nov;18(6):643-50
pubmed: 25620458
J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Sep;66(9):982-93
pubmed: 23683848
Br J Sports Med. 2017 Jul;51(13):991-992
pubmed: 28137786
Eur J Sport Sci. 2018 Oct;18(9):1280-1287
pubmed: 29860935
J Sports Sci. 2018 Mar;36(6):704-709
pubmed: 28562186
Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2006 Apr;16(2):83-92
pubmed: 16533346
Sports Med. 2006;36(6):459-72
pubmed: 16737340
J Sci Med Sport. 2018 Dec;21(12):1215-1220
pubmed: 29843960
Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2017 Sep;27(9):990-998
pubmed: 27418064
J Sci Med Sport. 2019 Jan;22(1):29-34
pubmed: 30057364
Br J Sports Med. 2019 Aug;53(15):921-922
pubmed: 29101104
J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Aug 15;:
pubmed: 30113918
J Sci Med Sport. 2017 Dec;20(12):1068-1074
pubmed: 28595869
J Sports Sci. 1997 Jun;15(3):335-40
pubmed: 9232559
Br J Sports Med. 2019 Feb;53(3):144-145
pubmed: 29886435
J Strength Cond Res. 2017 Jul;31(7):1821-1829
pubmed: 28640152
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2019 Feb 1;14(2):270-273
pubmed: 30614348
Int J Sports Med. 2019 Sep;40(9):597-600
pubmed: 31291651
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000100
pubmed: 19621070
J Sports Sci. 2004 May;22(5):409-17
pubmed: 15160594
J Sports Sci. 2008 Jun;26(8):863-73
pubmed: 18569552
Sports Med. 2010 Feb 1;40(2):163-78
pubmed: 20092367
J Sci Med Sport. 2017 Jun;20(6):561-565
pubmed: 27856198
Br J Sports Med. 2017 Aug;51(16):1215-1220
pubmed: 27789430
Br J Sports Med. 2017 Aug;51(16):1209-1214
pubmed: 28446456
Br J Sports Med. 2017 Mar;51(5):452-459
pubmed: 27450360
Sports Health. 2018 May/Jun;10(3):208-216
pubmed: 28825878
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2018 Jan 1;13(1):69-74
pubmed: 28459290
Br J Sports Med. 2003 Feb;37(1):13-29
pubmed: 12547739
Sports Med. 2017 May;47(5):943-974
pubmed: 27677917
Br J Sports Med. 2013 Aug;47(12):738-42
pubmed: 23645832
Sports Med. 2018 Aug;48(8):1929-1961
pubmed: 29943231
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017 Apr;12(Suppl 2):S2161-S2170
pubmed: 28463642
Br J Sports Med. 2007 May;41(5):328-31
pubmed: 17452684
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2018 Apr 1;13(4):442-451
pubmed: 28872423
Br J Sports Med. 2013 May;47(7):407-14
pubmed: 23515712
Br J Sports Med. 2017 May;51(9):749-754
pubmed: 28003238
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017 Oct;12(9):1238-1242
pubmed: 28253031
J Sports Sci. 2001 May;19(5):341-7
pubmed: 11354613
J Sci Med Sport. 2018 Jun;21(6):579-585
pubmed: 29079295
Br J Sports Med. 2017 Feb;51(3):209-210
pubmed: 27650255
Am J Epidemiol. 2004 May 1;159(9):882-90
pubmed: 15105181
Br J Sports Med. 2017 Apr;51(7):618-619
pubmed: 27222309
J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Oct;24(10):2593-603
pubmed: 20847703
Phys Sportsmed. 2016 Sep;44(3):283-9
pubmed: 27149248
Br J Sports Med. 2013 May;47(8):495-502
pubmed: 23038786
Sports Med. 2016 Jun;46(6):861-83
pubmed: 26822969
Br J Sports Med. 2017 Jun;51(12):969-977
pubmed: 28455362
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017 Mar;12(3):393-401
pubmed: 27400233
Br J Sports Med. 2017 Jun;51(11):838-847
pubmed: 28446457
Am J Sports Med. 2008 Aug;36(8):1597-603
pubmed: 18443276
Br J Sports Med. 2019 Aug;53(16):988-990
pubmed: 29807930
J Sci Med Sport. 2018 Mar;21(3):257-262
pubmed: 28595870
Am J Sports Med. 2013 Apr;41(4):749-55
pubmed: 23380159
Sports Med. 2014 Nov;44 Suppl 2:S139-47
pubmed: 25200666
Clin J Sport Med. 2007 May;17(3):192-6
pubmed: 17513910
Br J Sports Med. 2018 Dec;52(23):1517-1522
pubmed: 29626055
J Sports Sci. 2013;31(7):795-802
pubmed: 23244349
Br J Sports Med. 2005 Oct;39(10):757-66
pubmed: 16183774
Br J Sports Med. 2005 Aug;39(8):473-82
pubmed: 16046325
Br J Sports Med. 2016 Sep;50(17):1030-41
pubmed: 27535989
Br J Sports Med. 2016 Feb;50(4):231-6
pubmed: 26511006
Br J Sports Med. 2016 Aug;50(16):1008-12
pubmed: 26851288
Front Physiol. 2018 Sep 21;9:1280
pubmed: 30333756
Br J Sports Med. 2016 Jul;50(13):776-80
pubmed: 27095747
Br J Sports Med. 2005 Jun;39(6):340-6
pubmed: 15911603
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2016 Apr;11(3):350-5
pubmed: 26309331
J Strength Cond Res. 2001 Feb;15(1):109-15
pubmed: 11708692
Br J Sports Med. 2014 Apr;48(8):708-12
pubmed: 23962877
J Sci Med Sport. 2018 Jan;21(1):46-51
pubmed: 28601588
Sports Med. 2016 Sep;46(9):1333-53
pubmed: 26896951
Br J Sports Med. 2005 Jun;39(6):324-9
pubmed: 15911600
J Sci Med Sport. 2013 Nov;16(6):499-503
pubmed: 23333045
Br J Sports Med. 2016 Mar;50(5):281-91
pubmed: 26423706
Sports Med. 2018 Apr;48(4):837-848
pubmed: 29299876