A systematic review and network meta-analysis on the effectiveness of exercise-based interventions for reducing the injury incidence in youth team-sport players. Part 1: an analysis by classical training components.

This systematic review and network meta-analysis looked at whether exercise-based injury prevention programs (IPPs) reduce injury rates in youth team sport athletes (19 years or younger), and whether single-component or multi-component programs work better. Researchers pooled data from 21 studies, searching major databases up to January 2024, and analyzed effects on overall injuries as well as specific body regions including the lower extremity, thigh, knee, and ankle. Across the pooled studies, IPPs reduced overall and regional injury rates by approximately 35% compared to control groups. Programs built exclusively around strength or flexibility exercises, and those including stability work, showed the strongest injury-reduction effects, though these component-specific comparisons relied on indirect evidence within the network meta-analysis rather than head-to-head trials.

The authors note that direct comparisons between specific programs are still needed to confirm these estimates with more certainty.

This research combined findings from 21 studies to see whether exercise programs designed to prevent injuries actually work for young athletes (19 and under) playing team sports. It also looked at which types of exercises seemed most helpful. Overall, athletes who did these injury prevention programs had about one-third fewer injuries compared to those who didn't, including injuries to the legs, thighs, knees, and ankles.

Programs that focused specifically on strength training or flexibility exercises, or that included balance and stability work, appeared to have the biggest effect. However, the researchers point out an important caveat: the comparisons between different exercise types came from indirect evidence, meaning studies weren't directly testing one type of program against another head-to-head. So while the overall injury-reduction finding is based on solid pooled evidence, the specific claims about which components work best are less certain and need more direct research to confirm.

This is a summary of research, not medical advice. Talk to your own healthcare provider about anything affecting your care.

This network meta-analysis pooled 21 studies on exercise-based IPPs in youth team-sport athletes (≤19 years), evaluating effects on overall and region-specific injury incidence rates (lower extremity, thigh, knee, ankle). Quality was assessed using CONSORT, PEDro, and a Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, though the abstract does not detail overall risk-of-bias ratings across studies. Pooled analysis showed an average 35% reduction in injury incidence rates across overall and regional outcomes, with most IPPs demonstrating statistically significant risk mitigation for overall and lower-extremity injuries versus controls.

Strength-only interventions (IRR = 0.30, 95% CI 0.10-0.93) and flexibility-only interventions (IRR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.36-0.68) showed the strongest effects, with stability-inclusive programs also performing well.//However, these component-level comparisons stem from indirect evidence within the network meta-analysis framework, not head-to-head trials. The authors explicitly call for further direct comparative research between IPPs to strengthen confidence in which specific components drive the greatest risk reduction, an important caveat given the reliance on indirect network estimates for the component-specific conclusions.