Skip to navigationSkip to content
LÍDER MUNDIAL EN CÉSPED ARTIFICIAL
Por qué FieldTurf / Seguridad acreditada

Seguridad acreditada

No puede evitar las lesiones, pero puede limitarlas.

La seguridad de los atletas ha sido y será siempre nuestra primera prioridad. Cada día se llevan más lejos las fronteras de la investigación y la innovación en el diseño y la elaboración del sistema de césped artificial más avanzado de la industria. Sabemos que ningún deporte está exento del riesgo de lesiones, pero seguimos explorando nuevas maneras de reducir los riesgos y la seriedad de cualquier lesión. Nuestro enfoque en la seguridad nos ha llevado a generar numerosas mejoras e innovaciones en la reducción de posibles lesiones. Como resultado, ofrecemos el producto y la experiencia que proporcionan el terreno de juego más seguro posible para los deportistas. Algunos estudios independientes plurianuales validan nuestros esfuerzos de brindarle el campo más seguro, tanto a usted como a sus deportistas.

FÚTBOL UNIVERSITARIO

FIELDTURF FRENTE A CÉSPED NATURAL

Estudio de 3 años

Los sistemas de FieldTurf han conducido al:

  • 13 % menos de distensiones musculares/desgarros
  • 11 % menos de contusiones
  • 31 % menos de desgarros de ligamentos
  • 24 % menos de torceduras del tobillo superior
  • 21 % menos de lesiones graves
  • 23 % menos de lesiones en superficies de entre más de 4 y 8 años

Fútbol en el instituto

Fieldturf frente a césped natural

Estudio de 5 años

Los sistemas de FieldTurf han conducido al:

  • 44 % menos de lesiones combinadas de golpes
  • 43 % menos de lesiones combinadas de ligamento cruzado anterior
  • 25 % menos de tiempo perdido por lesiones de largo plazo (más de 22 días de duración)
  • 16 % menos de tiempo perdido por lesiones de corto plazo (entre 1 y 2 días de duración)

HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL

FIELDS WITH SHOCK PADS VS FIELDS WITHOUT

7-year study

Fields without pads led to:

  • 53% less player-to-turf collision injuries
  • 39% less shoulder girdle trauma
  • 63% less lower leg injuries
  • 73% less neck trauma

See the full study

When are shock pads recommended?
There are some situations where a shock pad is highly recommend. When installing light-weight infill systems, common with alternative / natural infills like cork, coconut and/or olive, there isn’t enough material in the system to provide the necessary shock absorption. To meet the needed industry safety requirements, a shock pad is added under the system to provide the adequate performance.

HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL

heavyweight infill VS other infill weight surfaces

7-year study

Systems with >9 lbs per square foot of infill compared to all other infill weight surfaces led to:

  • 19%-29% lower incidence of total injuries
  • 35%-55% lower incidence of Substantial injuries
  • 19%-26% lower incidence of severe injuries
  • 32%-47% lower incidence of player-to-turf injuries
  • 17%-22% lower incidence of Ligament Sprains and Tears
  • 58%-63% lower incidence of injuries on surfaces aged 8+ years, vs systems with 0-5.9 lbs per square foot

See the full study

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE

FIELDTURF VS NATURAL GRASS & COMPETING SYSTEMS

4-year study

ACL Injury Rate per Team Games Played:

  • .048 FieldTurf
  • .050 Natural Grass
  • .053 Competing Turf Systems

See the full study

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE

FIELDTURF VS NATURAL GRASS

7-year study

Achilles Tendon Injuries:

When analyzing the rates of achilles tendon tear while comparing ground surfaces (grass and artificial turf), we revealed no significant difference in tear rates.

See the full study

COLLEGE men's soccer

FIELDTURF VS NATURAL GRASS

6-year study

FieldTurf systems led to:

  • 25% Fewer Total Injuries
  • 20% Fewer Severe Injuries
  • 33% Fewer Concussions
  • 15% Fewer Injuries due to player-to-surface collisions

See the full study

COLLEGE women's soccer

FIELDTURF VS NATURAL GRASS

5-year study

FieldTurf systems led to:

  • 11% Fewer Total Injuries
  • 33% Fewer Severe Injuries
  • 57% Fewer Injuries on Surfaces 8+ years old
  • 17% Fewer Injuries in Rain-Field Conditions

See the full study

Italian Major League - Soccer

Artificial Turf vs Grass

One Season of Division I Play

Study concluded: No difference in injury risk on natural grass and artificial turf in elite professional soccer athletes.

See the full study

Amateur Soccer

Artificial Turf vs Grass

Skin Abrasions Due to Sliding on Playing Surface

Study concluded: No evidence of more skin related traumatic injuries when a slide was performed on artificial turf compared to natural grass.

See the full study

Fútbol MLS

Césped artificial frente a césped

Estudio de 4 años

Resultados del estudio: La tasa general de lesiones en césped artificial era “no inferior” o igual en césped natural.

Leer el estudio completo.

College Men's & Women's Soccer

Artificial Turf VS Natural Grass

10-year study

Study concluded: NCAA soccer players who practice on natural grass have increased risk of ACL injury (8.67 times more likely) compared with the risk of those practicing on an artificial surface, regardless of sex or NCAA division of play. No difference in risk of ACL injury between playing surfaces was detected during matches.

See the full study

Effects of Playing Surface on Physical, Physiological and Perceptual Responses

artificial vs grass

Study concluded:

  • An improved physical performance on artificial turf compared to natural grass.
  • Performance tasks incorporating greater reliance on agility and change of direction ability are more likely to be enhanced on artificial turf compared to natural grass.
  • The improved physical performance on artificial turf was accompanied by improved perceptual and some blood biochemistry (Lac, Neu and LYM) responses.

See the full study

Empezar