ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2025
No difference in sudden-onset injury risk between artificial turf and natural grass for Finnish female elite-level footballers: A five-season study.
Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- No difference in sudden-onset injury risk between artificial turf and natural grass for Finnish female elite-level footballers: A five-season study.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeEvidence on injury incidence on artificial turf for female footballers is conflicting. Some studies have found no difference in injury rates, while others have suggested increased knee injury risk. The aim of this study was to compare match injury incidences between artificial turf and natural grass in the Finnish female premier division of football.
methodsAll teams in the Finnish female premier division of football were invited to participate in a five-season prospective cohort study, and eight to ten teams took part depending on the season. Injuries were reported by players in weekly questionnaires and categorised by anatomical region, recurrence, contact, severity, and playing position. Individual match exposure was tabled, and incidences per 1000 h of match exposure and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for both surface types.
resultsA total of 517 league matches (401 on artificial turf and 116 on natural grass) were played during the five-season follow-up. In that time, 237 sudden-onset injuries (184 on artificial turf and 53 on natural grass) were reported. The overall injury incidence rate was 19.6/1000 match hours on artificial turf and 19.3/1000 match hours on natural grass (IRR 1.0, 95% CI 0.7-1.4). No statistical difference was observed for risk in knee injuries or other subcategories.
conclusionsThis study found no evidence of a difference in match injury risk between artificial turf and natural grass for elite level female footballers. Research with modern non-filler surfaces will be needed as pitches containing microplastic pollution are banned in the European Union. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.