AbstractBackground Compliance with injury risk reduction measures (IRRM) has been reported to be low in the context of scientific studies as well as adherence to IRRM in applied practice.Objective To discuss the interest of individualisation of IRRM and its implementation.Design Opinion presentation. Level of evidence 5.Results One promising strategy to improve both IRRM effectiveness and athlete' adherence is through individualisation of IRRM and its implementation. Individualisation of IRRM should improve their effectiveness by better matching/targeting athlete's deficiencies/deficits and risk factors. The adoption and implementation of IRRM by athlete may also benefit from such an approach as it aims to better meet the athlete's individual needs. Individualisation of IRRM implementation should improve athlete's adherence to the IRRM and consequently their effectiveness. IRRM individualisation could be done through individual screening in different domains to determine individual deficiencies/deficits. Individualisation of IRRM implementation could be achieved through individual screening of the socio-cognitive determinants of behaviours, by identifying adherence's barriers and facilitators, considering socio-cognitive, social and organisational factors. The content of the screening and their regularity should be of course adapted to the practical aspects (e.g., material, human resources, athletes' age and level), their scientific evidence, as well as the variations of the measured parameters. The development of the overall approach requires a co-construction with multidisciplinary teamwork, including researchers and clinicians, and end-users (e.g., coach, player, healthcare provider) and members of the target community, meaning a public involvement. The athlete should be at the centre of the project.Conclusions We believe that promoting IRRM based on individual characteristics and enhancing IRRM adoption of athletes and their staff can help to improve both adherence and in turn effectiveness of IRRM. There is now a need to evaluate its effectiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2024 study studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: