ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To compare the injury profiles of football players shifting between second and first teams with those of second- and first-team players, and to examine the opinions of shifting players. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: 170 male players from Athletic Club (second teamâ¯=â¯90, shiftingâ¯=â¯20, first teamâ¯=â¯60) were followed over eight seasons. Injuries and exposure time were recorded following the FIFA consensus, and 18 shifting players answered a seven-item questionnaire on their experience. RESULTS: 35â¯% shifting players became full-time first-team players, in contrast to only 8â¯% of second-team players (odds ratioâ¯=â¯6.4, pâ¯<â¯0.01). There were no differences in the overall injury incidence, but the overall burden of injuries was higher in second-team (172â¯days lost/1000â¯h) and shifting players (194â¯days lost/1000â¯h) compared with first-team players (114â¯days lost/1000â¯h, pâ¯<â¯0.01). Shifting players had a higher burden of knee joint/ligament injuries compared with first-team players (137 vs. 18â¯days lost/1000â¯h, pâ¯<â¯0.01) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures (122 vs. 10â¯days lost/1000â¯h, pâ¯<â¯0.01). There was a trend towards a higher burden of ACL ruptures in shifting players than in second-team players (122 vs. 41â¯days lost/1000â¯h, pâ¯=â¯0.07). Shifting players reported constant pressure and better communication with the second-team coaching staff than with the first-team staff. CONCLUSIONS: The high burden of injuries in shifting players, particularly from ACL ruptures, highlights the need for action. Ensuring high-quality communication between second- and first-team staff remains a key challenge.