↓ Skip to main content

Prevention of non‐contact anterior cruciate ligament injuries in soccer players. Part 1: Mechanisms of injury and underlying risk factors

Overview of attention for article published in Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, May 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
23 X users
patent
3 patents
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
673 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
2220 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Prevention of non‐contact anterior cruciate ligament injuries in soccer players. Part 1: Mechanisms of injury and underlying risk factors
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, May 2009
DOI 10.1007/s00167-009-0813-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eduard Alentorn‐Geli, Gregory D. Myer, Holly J. Silvers, Gonzalo Samitier, Daniel Romero, Cristina Lázaro‐Haro, Ramón Cugat

Abstract

Soccer is the most commonly played sport in the world, with an estimated 265 million active soccer players by 2006. Inherent to this sport is the higher risk of injury to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) relative to other sports. ACL injury causes the most time lost from competition in soccer which has influenced a strong research focus to determine the risk factors for injury. This research emphasis has afforded a rapid influx of literature defining potential modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors that increase the risk of injury. The purpose of the current review is to sequence the most recent literature that reports potential mechanisms and risk factors for non-contact ACL injury in soccer players. Most ACL tears in soccer players are non-contact in nature. Common playing situations precluding a non-contact ACL injury include: change of direction or cutting maneuvers combined with deceleration, landing from a jump in or near full extension, and pivoting with knee near full extension and a planted foot. The most common non-contact ACL injury mechanism include a deceleration task with high knee internal extension torque (with or without perturbation) combined with dynamic valgus rotation with the body weight shifted over the injured leg and the plantar surface of the foot fixed flat on the playing surface. Potential extrinsic non-contact ACL injury risk factors include: dry weather and surface, and artificial surface instead of natural grass. Commonly purported intrinsic risk factors include: generalized and specific knee joint laxity, small and narrow intercondylar notch width (ratio of notch width to the diameter and cross sectional area of the ACL), pre-ovulatory phase of menstrual cycle in females not using oral contraceptives, decreased relative (to quadriceps) hamstring strength and recruitment, muscular fatigue by altering neuromuscular control, decreased "core" strength and proprioception, low trunk, hip, and knee flexion angles, and high dorsiflexion of the ankle when performing sport tasks, lateral trunk displacement and hip adduction combined with increased knee abduction moments (dynamic knee valgus), and increased hip internal rotation and tibial external rotation with or without foot pronation. The identified mechanisms and risk factors for non-contact ACL injuries have been mainly studied in female soccer players; thus, further research in male players is warranted. Non-contact ACL injuries in soccer players likely has a multi-factorial etiology. The identification of those athletes at increased risk may be a salient first step before designing and implementing specific pre-season and in-season training programs aimed to modify the identified risk factors and to decrease ACL injury rates. Current evidence indicates that this crucial step to prevent ACL injury is the only option to effectively prevent the sequelae of osteoarthritis associated with this traumatic injury.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2,220 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 15 <1%
Spain 6 <1%
Germany 4 <1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Other 11 <1%
Unknown 2173 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 432 19%
Student > Master 364 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 203 9%
Researcher 120 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 110 5%
Other 376 17%
Unknown 615 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 620 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 443 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 243 11%
Engineering 81 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 2%
Other 129 6%
Unknown 662 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,061,674
of 25,321,938 outputs
Outputs from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#65
of 2,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,624
of 103,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#1
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,321,938 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 103,671 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.