CONTEXT: Evaluating the translatability and feasibility of an intervention program has become as important as determining the effectiveness of the intervention. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the applicability of a 3-month jump-landing training program in basketball players, using the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: National and regional basketball teams. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four teams of the second highest national division and regional basketball divisions in Flanders, Belgium, were randomly assigned (1:1) to a control group and intervention group. A total of 243 athletes (control group = 129, intervention group = 114), ages 15 to 41 years, volunteered. INTERVENTION(S): All exercises in the intervention program followed a progressive development, emphasizing lower extremity alignment during jump-landing activities. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The results of the process evaluation of the intervention program were based on the 5 dimensions of the RE-AIM framework. The injury incidence density, hazard ratios, and 95% confidence intervals were determined. RESULTS: The participation rate of the total sample was 100% (reach). The hazard ratio was different between the intervention group and the control group (0.40 [95% confidence interval = 0.16, 0.99]; effectiveness). Of the 12 teams in the intervention group, 8 teams (66.7%) agreed to participate in the study (adoption). Eight of the participating coaches (66.7%) felt positively about the intervention program and stated that they had implemented the training sessions of the program as intended (implementation). All coaches except 1 (87.5%) intended to continue the intervention program the next season (maintenance). CONCLUSIONS: Compliance of the coaches in this coach-supervised jump-landing training program was high. In addition, the program was effective in preventing lower extremity injuries.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aerts et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: