Factors Influencing Team Performance:What Can Support Teams in High-Performance Sport Learn from Other Industries? A Systematic Scoping Review

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of our systematic scoping review was to explore the factors influencing team function and performance across various industries and discuss findings in the context of the high-performance sport support team setting. These outcomes may also be used to inform future research into high-performance teamwork in sport. METHODS: A systematic scoping review of literature published in English since 2000 reporting team-based performance outcomes and included a performance metric that was ‘team outcome based’ was conducted using search of the Academic Search Ultimate, Medline, Business Source Ultimate, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Military database (ProQuest) using the terms: ‘team’, ‘function’ OR ‘dysfunction’, ‘Perform*’ OR ‘outcome’. RESULTS: Application of the search strategy identified a total of 11,735 articles for title and abstract review. Seventy-three articles were selected for full-text assessment with the aim to extract data for either quantitative or qualitative analysis. Forty-six of the 73 articles met our inclusion criteria; 27 articles were excluded as they did not report a performance metric. Eleven studies explored leadership roles and styles on team performance, three studies associated performance feedback to team performance, and 12 studies explored the relationship between supportive behaviour and performance. Team orientation and adaptability as key figures of team performance outcomes were explored in 20 studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings identified 4 key variables that were associated with team function and performance across a variety of industries; (i) leadership styles, (ii) supportive team behaviour, (iii) communication, and (iv) performance feedback. High-performance teams wishing to improve performance should examine these factors within their team and its environment. It is widely acknowledged that the dynamics of team function is important for outcomes in high-performance sport, yet there is little evidence to provide guidance. This inequality between real-world need and the available evidence should be addressed in future research. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40798-021-00406-7

Eccentric hamstring strength in young athletes is best documented when normalised to body mass: a cross-sectional study with normative data of 590 athletes from different age categories

Despite its widespread use in adults, the Nordic hamstring exercise remains underexplored in athletic youth populations. Further, given the dynamic nature of growth and maturation, comparisons with elite adult populations may be inaccurate. Here we describe absolute and body mass-normalised eccentric hamstring normative values for football, athletics and multi-sport youth populations. 676 routine standardised tests were conducted, including 244 U12–U18 student-athletes (football, athletics, multi-sport) and 346 Qatar Stars League (QSL) football players using the NordBord. The average maximum values for the left and right leg from 3 repetitions were recorded. Significant increases in absolute strength were seen across chronological (e.g., 150 N±15 for U12 to 330 N±40 for U18) and skeletal (142.9 N±13.9 for skeletal age of 12 compared to 336.2 N±71.2 for skeletal age of 18) age groups. The differences in values normalised to body mass were smaller at 3.6 N/kg±0.25 for the U-13 group, but similar for the U14 to U18 groups (4.5 N/kg±0.16, 4.6 N/kg±0.11, 4.6 N/kg±0.27, 4.7 N/kg±0.14, 4.5 N/kg±0.18). Students displayed lower absolute strength than the professional football players (272.1 N compared to 297.3 N, p < 0.0001) but higher relative strength (4.7 N/kg compared to 4.2 N/kg, p < 0.0001). Comparing Nordic hamstring strength values between athletes, and between skeletal and chronological age groups can be done when values are normalised to the athlete’s body mass. For the U14s and onwards age categories, body mass normalised values are comparable to professional football players

Injury characteristics in male youth athletics: a five-season prospective study in a full-time sports academy

Objectives To describe the injury characteristics of male youth athletes exposed to year-round athletics programmes. Methods Injury surveillance data were prospectively collected by medical staff in a cohort of youth athletics athletes participating in a full-time sports academy from 2014-2015 to 2018-2019. Time-loss injuries (>1 day) were recorded following consensus procedures for athletics. Athletes were clustered into five event groups (sprints, jumps, endurance, throws and non-specialised) and the number of completed training and competition sessions (athletics exposures (AE)) were calculated for each athlete per completed season (one athlete season). Injury characteristics were reported overall and by event groups as injury incidence (injuries per 1000 AE) and injury burden (days lost per 1000 AE). Results One-hundred and seventy-eight boys (14.9±1.8 years old) completed 391 athlete seasons, sustaining 290 injuries. The overall incidence was 4.0 injuries per 1000 AE and the overall burden was 79.1 days lost per 1000 AE. The thigh was the most common injury location (19%). Muscle strains (0.7 injuries per 1000 AE) and bone stress injuries (0.5 injuries per 1000 AE) presented the highest incidence and stress fractures the highest burden (17.6 days lost per 1000 AE). The most burdensome injury types by event group were: bone stress injuries for endurance, hamstring strains for sprints, stress fractures for jumps, lesion of meniscus/cartilage for throws and growth plate injuries for non-specialised athletes. Conclusion Acute muscle strains, stress fractures and bone stress injuries were identified as the main injury concerns in this cohort of young male athletics athletes. The injury characteristics differed between event groups

Involving research‐invested clinicians in data collection affects injury incidence in youth football

It is well established that differences in injury definition and recording methodology restrict comparisons between injury surveillance programmes. There is, however, little documentation of the variation that can exist between data recorders. The aim of this study was, therefore, to explore the effect on reported injuries when team recorders or supervisors are involved in research. Injury data collected prospectively over five seasons for the U16, U17, and U18 age groups in a youth football (soccer) academy were used to compare different recording settings based on the research involvement of the clinicians. A research‐invested team physiotherapist reported an 8.8 times greater incidence (P < 0.001) of non‐time‐loss injuries and a 2.5 times greater incidence (P < 0.001) of minimal injuries (1‐3 days lost) compared to a setting where neither the team physiotherapists nor the supervisor relied on the collected data for research purposes. When team physiotherapists were not invested in research themselves but were supervised by a researcher, the incidence of non‐time‐loss injuries and minimal injuries was 2.5 times (P < 0.001) and 2.0 times greater (P < 0.01) than in the non‐invested setting, respectively. However, there were no differences between recording settings for overall incidence of time‐loss injuries. The results from this study demonstrate that involving clinicians that are relying on the collected data for research purposes can significantly affect the reported rates of non‐time‐loss and minimal injuries. Time‐loss injuries overall were not affected by research investment, and should therefore be preferred for comparisons between teams and seasons