Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
11.22 Effects of playing surface on concussion incidence in NCAA football: 2004–2014 seasons
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
11.22 Effects of playing surface on concussion incidence in NCAA football: 2004–2014 seasons
Do you wish to request the book?
11.22 Effects of playing surface on concussion incidence in NCAA football: 2004–2014 seasons
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
11.22 Effects of playing surface on concussion incidence in NCAA football: 2004–2014 seasons
2024
Overview
ObjectiveThe use of cost-saving artificial playing surfaces continues to grow in popularity; now outnumbering natural grass by a 3:1 ration in NCAA football. The relationship of artificial surfaces to concussion remains poorly defined. To determine if difference exist in rates of SRCs caused by helmet to surface during NCAA football events played on artificial turf surfaces as compared to natural grass.DesignDescriptive epidemiology study.Setting and ParticipantsDuring the 2004–2005 through 2013–2014 NCAA football seasons, all participating college football players who were diagnosed with concussions that occurred during practices and games for preseason, regular season and postseason periods.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe NCAA Injury Surveillance System (ISS) Men’s Football Data Set for 2004–2014 seasons was analyzed to determine the incidence of concussions. Injury rates were calculated per 10,000 athlete exposures (AEs) and rate ratios (RR) were used to compare injury rates during different event contact-mechanisms compared on the two different playing surfaces. Analogous methods were used to compare concussion injury rates during games on turf versus natural grass stratified by specific mechanism of injury.Results3,009,2015 athlete exposures and 1,919 concussions on natural grass or artificial turf surfaces were reported from 2004–2014. Concussion rates were significantly higher during games as compared to practices (30.10 vs. 4.04 per 10,000 AEs respectively; P<0.001). When stratified by mechanism of injury, athletes participating in games on artificial turf experienced concussions resulting from contact with the playing surface at 2.12 times the rate compared to those playing on natural grass (RR=2.12; 95% CI 1.03 – 4.62).Conclusions and RelevanceArtificial turf is a risk factor for concussions caused by contact with the playing surface in NCAA football games more than natural grass and is now a proven concern to be addressed.
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Association of Sport and Exercise Medicine,BMJ Publishing Group LTD
Subject
