Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Sports Act. Living

Sec. Injury Prevention and Rehabilitation

Volume 7 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fspor.2025.1565036

This article is part of the Research TopicEpidemiology of Orthopaedic Sports Trauma and InjuriesView all 6 articles

Does the format matter? A cross-sectional analysis of suspected injuries and game events across the different versions of field hockey

Provisionally accepted
Stephen  William WestStephen William West1,2,3*Jamie  BovingtonJamie Bovington4Jodie  DaleJodie Dale4Tommy  AlexanderTommy Alexander5Alison  KeoghAlison Keogh6Sinead  HoldenSinead Holden7,8
  • 1Centre for Health, and Injury & Illness Prevention in Sport, University of Bath, Bath, England, United Kingdom
  • 2UK Collaborating Centre on Injury and Illness Prevention in Sport, Bath, United Kingdom
  • 3Sport Injury Prevention Research Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
  • 4University of Bath, Bath, England, United Kingdom
  • 5Der Club an der Alster, Hamburg, Germany
  • 6Department of Clinical Medicine, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, County Dublin, Ireland
  • 7Institute for Sport and Health, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  • 8School of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sports Science, College of Health and Agricultural Sciences, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Field Hockey is a popular global sport played by both men and women in three different formats: 11-a-side outdoor hockey (11s), 6-a-side indoor hockey, and 5-a-side Hockey5s. To date, comparisons across formats for match events and injury rates have not occurred. Using an established video analysis methodology, this study aimed to compare match events (per 10 minutes of play) and suspected injury rates across formats and sexes. A hockey-specific video coding window was co-created with community partners, before being deployed to capture outcomes of interest in 30 international hockey matches (10 per format, 50% male/ female). Twenty-seven suspected injuries were identified. The most common trends in these injuries included; being to the head/neck (26%); contusion in nature (74%); ball-player contact mechanism (44%); 74% to defending player. No evidence of significant differences in injury rates between formats or sexes were identified, however a trend towards higher rates in men’s vs women’s was identified [Rate ratio (RR) range: 1.14-5.00] as well as in Hockey5s for men and 11s for women. Game events differed significantly across formats for both men and women. Increased outcomes which could be deemed “exciting’ (e.g. shots, shooting zone entries) differed between formats, however the success (e.g. shots on target vs off target) of these increased “exciting” outcomes was often lower in formats with higher rates. The findings of this study suggest the need for a more in-depth investigation into differences between formats, which may include mixed methods approaches to capture fan engagement, player perception, and injury risk.

Keywords: policy, prevention, Sport, injury, performance

Received: 22 Jan 2025; Accepted: 21 Jul 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 West, Bovington, Dale, Alexander, Keogh and Holden. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Stephen William West, Centre for Health, and Injury & Illness Prevention in Sport, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, England, United Kingdom

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.