RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Pre-season screening currently has no value for injury prediction: The development and internal validation of a multivariable prognostic model to predict indirect muscle injury risk in elite football (soccer) players
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 19012054
DO 10.1101/19012054
A1 Hughes, Tom
A1 Riley, Richard D.
A1 Callaghan, Michael J.
A1 Sergeant, Jamie C.
YR 2019
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/11/15/19012054.abstract
AB Background In elite football (soccer), periodic health examination (PHE) could provide prognostic factors to predict injury risk.Objective To develop and internally validate a prognostic model to predict individual indirect (non-contact) muscle injury (IMI) risk during a season in elite footballers, only using PHE-derived candidate prognostic factors.Methods Routinely collected preseason PHE and injury data were used from 119 players over 5 seasons (1st July 2013 to 19th May 2018). Ten candidate prognostic factors (12 parameters) were included in model development. Multiple imputation was used to handle missing values. The outcome was any time-loss, index indirect muscle injury (I-IMI) affecting the lower extremity. A full logistic regression model was fitted, and a parsimonious model developed using backward-selection to remove non-significant factors. Predictive performance was assessed through calibration, discrimination and decision-curve analysis, averaged across all imputed datasets. The model was internally validated using bootstrapping and adjusted for overfitting.Results During 317 participant-seasons, 138 I-IMIs were recorded. The parsimonious model included only age and frequency of previous IMIs; apparent calibration was perfect but discrimination was modest (C-index = 0.641, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.580 to 0.703), with clinical utility evident between risk thresholds of 37-71%. After validation and overfitting adjustment, performance deteriorated (C-index = 0.580; calibration-in-the-large =-0.031, calibration slope =0.663).Conclusion The selected PHE data were insufficient prognostic factors from which to develop a useful model for predicting IMI risk in elite footballers. Further research should prioritise identifying novel prognostic factors to improve future risk prediction models in this field.Trial registration number NCT03782389KEY POINTSFactors measured through preseason screening generally have weak prognostic strength for future indirect muscle injuries and further research is needed to identify novel, robust prognostic factors.Because of sample size restrictions, and until the evidence base improves, it is likely that any further attempts at creating a prognostic model at individual club level would also suffer from poor performance.The value of using preseason screening data to make injury predictions or to select bespoke injury prevention strategies remains to be demonstrated, so screening should only be considered as useful for detection of salient pathology or for rehabilitation/ performance monitoring purposes at this time.Competing Interest StatementConflict of interest: Tom Hughes and Michael J. Callaghan are employed by Manchester United Football Club. Richard D. Riley, and Jamie C. Sergeant declare that they have no known conflicts of interest. Clinical TrialNCT03782389Clinical Protocols https://diagnprognres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41512-019-0063-8 Funding StatementFunding: The lead researcher (TH) is receiving sponsorship from Manchester United Football Club to complete a postgraduate PhD study programme. This work was also supported by Versus Arthritis: grant number 21755.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAn anonymised summary of the dataset that was analysed during this study may be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.