Heading in Football: Incidence, Biomechanical Characteristics and the Association with Acute Cognitive Function-A Three-Part Systematic Review.

backgroundThere is growing concern surrounding the role of repetitive sub-concussive head impacts, such as football heading, on brain health.

objectivesThree questions were addressed while only considering studies that observed heading exposure directly: (1) how frequently does heading occur within football training and matches, (2) what are the biomechanical characteristics of heading, and (3) is cognitive function affected by heading?

methodsThis review followed the steps described in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Electronic databases including MEDLINE and SPORTDiscus were searched from the earliest entry to July 2020. Studies that reported independently quantified heading exposure, biomechanical characteristics of heading or the relationship between heading and cognitive function were included. Data were extracted and used to populate summary tables with reference to each research question.

resultsHeading incidence ranged between one to nine headers per player per match. The number of headers observed in small-sided games during training varied depending on the exact format used but generally speaking ranged between zero to one per player per game. The three most commonly reported biomechanical variables were head acceleration, head rotational velocity and overall movement kinematics during the heading action. Average head acceleration ranged from approximately four to 50 g. Nine out of 12 included studies did not observe a negative impact on cognitive test performance following exposure to heading and while three did, these negative effects were limited to specific outcome measures: reaction time and memory function.

conclusionThe current weight of evidence summarised herein does not support the notion that heading is deleterious to cognitive performance in the short term; however, this conclusion is tentative due to methodological shortcomings in the existing evidence base.