Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32572824›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2020

Is the Acute: Chronic Workload Ratio (ACWR) Associated with Risk of Time-Loss Injury in Professional Team Sports? A Systematic Review of Methodology, Variables and Injury Risk in Practical Situations.

Renato Andrade, Eirik Halvorsen Wik, Alexandre Rebelo-Marques, Peter Blanch, Rodney Whiteley, João Espregueira-Mendes, Tim J Gabbett

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Renato AndradeClínica Do Dragão, Espregueira-Mendes Sports Centre-FIFA Medical Centre of Excellence, Estadio do Dragão, Entrada Nascente, Piso-3, 4350-415, Porto, Portugal. randrade@espregueira.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7636-7816
Eirik Halvorsen WikAspetar Sports Injury and Illness Prevention Programme, Aspetar Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Hospital, Doha, Qatar.
Alexandre Rebelo-MarquesClínica Do Dragão, Espregueira-Mendes Sports Centre-FIFA Medical Centre of Excellence, Estadio do Dragão, Entrada Nascente, Piso-3, 4350-415, Porto, Portugal.
Peter BlanchFootball Department, Brisbane Lions Football Club, Brisbane, Australia.
Rodney WhiteleyAspetar Sports Medicine Hospital, Doha, Qatar.
João Espregueira-MendesClínica Do Dragão, Espregueira-Mendes Sports Centre-FIFA Medical Centre of Excellence, Estadio do Dragão, Entrada Nascente, Piso-3, 4350-415, Porto, Portugal.
Tim J GabbettGabbett Performance Solutions, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe acute: chronic workload ratio (ACWR) is an index of the acute workload relative to the cumulative chronic workloads. The monitoring of physical workloads using the ACWR has emerged and been hypothesized as a useful tool for coaches and athletes to optimize performance while aiming to reduce the risk of potentially preventable load-driven injuries.

objectivesOur goal was to describe characteristics of the ACWR and investigate the association of the ACWR with the risk of time-loss injuries in adult elite team sport athletes. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE and grey literature databases; inception to May 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Longitudinal studies that assess the relationship of the ACWR and time-loss injury risk in adult professional or elite team sports.

methodsWe summarized the population characteristics, workload metrics and ACWR calculation methods. For each workload metric, we plotted the risk estimates for the ACWR in isolation, or when combined with chronic workloads. Methodological quality was assessed using a modified version of the Downs and Black scale.

resultsTwenty studies comprising 2375 injuries from 1234 athletes (all males and mean age of 24 years) from different sports were included. Internal (65%) and external loads (70%) were collected in more than half of the studies and the session-rating of perceived exertion and total distance were the most commonly collected metrics. The ACWR was commonly calculated using the coupled method (95%), 1:4 weekly blocks (95%) and subsequent week injury lag (80%). There were 14 different binning methods with almost none of the studies using the same binning categories.

conclusionThe majority of studies suggest that athletes are at greater risk of sustaining a time-loss injury when the ACWR is higher relative to a lower or moderate ACWR. The heterogenous methodological approaches not only reflect the wide range of sports studied and the differing demands of these activities, but also limit the strength of recommendations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017067585.

Indexed as

Athletic InjuriesTeam SportsWorkloadAdultHumansMaleRisk FactorsYoung Adult

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.