↓ Skip to main content

Drill-Specific Head Impacts in Collegiate Football Practice: Implications for Reducing “Friendly Fire” Exposure

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Biomedical Engineering, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Drill-Specific Head Impacts in Collegiate Football Practice: Implications for Reducing “Friendly Fire” Exposure
Published in
Annals of Biomedical Engineering, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10439-018-2088-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Breton M. Asken, Zechariah S. Brooke, Taylor C. Stevens, Paul G. Silvestri, Matthew J. Graham, Michael S. Jaffee, James R. Clugston

Abstract

This study investigated drill-specific head impact biomechanics in a Division 1 collegiate football team using the Head Impact Telemetry System (HITS). A total of 32,083 impacts were recorded across 2 years of practices. Precise tracking of instrumented athletes, head impacts, and drill participation allowed quantification of hits sustained per person per minute (H/P/M) for each specific drill. We found significant H/P/M variability between 14 drills and player position, ranging from 0.02 to 0.41 H/P/M for Linemen and 0.01 to 0.15 H/P/M for Non-Linemen. Impact magnitude data are also reported for practice term (Spring, Training Camp, In-Season) and dress-type (Helmets Only, Spyders, Shells, Full Pads). Recommendations for shortening high-risk drills, based on H/P/M drill impact frequencies, suggest possible "friendly fire" reductions of 1000 impacts for Linemen and 300 impacts for Non-Linemen over their collegiate career. Over 80% of potentially avoidable head impacts were attributable to just three drills-"Team Run," "Move the Field," and "Team." Recommending drill-specific modifications based on practical considerations (the drill's impact frequency, dress-types when performing the drill, and duration) could improve acceptance from coaches and efficiently reduce head impact exposure without drastically altering overall practice structure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 16%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 23 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 11%
Sports and Recreations 5 9%
Engineering 5 9%
Psychology 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 30 53%