Does the format matter? A cross-sectional analysis of injury patterns across the different versions of field hockey

Introduction: 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. Methods: Using an established video analysis methodology, this study aimed to compare match events (per 10 min of play) and suspected injury rates across formats and genders. 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). Results: 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 genders 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. Discussion: 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.