{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03844454264250994, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0273972602739726, 'mean_word_length': 5.639296187683285, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
EFFECTIVELY TRAINING PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHERS TO IMPLEMENT INJURY PREVENTIVE STRATEGIES INTO THEIR PE LESSONS

Background Physical education teachers (PETs) can be effectively trained to implement injury preventive strategies into their own lives.1 However, to decrease negative effects of sports injuries in adolescents, injury prevention within this population is needed as well. Therefore, the current study trains PETs to implement injury preventive strategies both in their own lives and in their PE lessons. Objective Aim 1 was investigating whether an intervention can effectively improve PETs' injury preventive knowledge. Aim 2 was investigating whether the intervention led to more injury preventive implementation in PETs own extracurricular sporting activities. Aim 3 was investigating whether the intervention enhanced PET injury preventive implementation in their PE lessons. Design An RCT was conducted. Setting Secondary school PETs, active in second grade (14–16 years), were recruited. Participants Fourteen PETs were randomly assigned to either intervention (Mage 41.43±10.21) or control group (Mage 38.86±8.32). Per PET one of their classes of pupils from second grade was questioned (n=271). Interventions An effective injury prevention intervention1 was provided with adaptations for a more easily implementation in PE lessons. Main Outcome Measurements PET injury preventive knowledge, preventive behaviour in extracurricular sporting activities and during PE lessons were assessed at three different time points; before the intervention (pre), 4 (post) and 7 weeks (follow-up) after receiving the intervention. Pupils filled out a questionnaire on their PET injury preventive teaching behaviour (pre-post-follow-up). Results The injury prevention intervention resulted in an improvement of PET injury preventive knowledge (F(10,2)=7.718, p=0.005), PET preventive behaviour in own extracurricular sporting activities (F(14,2)=4.105; p=0.047) and in their teaching behaviour towards the pupils in PE lessons (F(14,2)=3.147; p=0.061). Reports of pupils pointed in the same direction as the reports of PETs. Conclusions The intervention improved PET injury preventive knowledge and behaviour, both in their own lives as in their PE lessons.