Multiple injury prevention exercise programmes have demonstrated efficacy under randomised controlled conditions.1 However, successfully implementing these programmes under real-world conditions poses a significant challenge. It is well documented that football teams modify programmes to better fit their specific context, drawing not only on evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) but also their past experiences, guidelines and individual player screening data.2 Furthermore, evaluation of injury prevention programmes under real-world conditions demonstrates that increased programme adaptability, variation and individualisation can facilitate implementation efforts.2 Modifying efficacious programmes can potentially enhance context-specificity but may also jeopardise fidelity. Replicating the exact protocol from an RCT increases the chances of achieving the desired injury reduction, but failing to consider the intricacies of the specific implementation context and modify the intervention accordingly increases the risk of poor adherence. Balancing these dual aspirations of fidelity and context-specific modifications has been coined the adaptation-fidelity dilemma.3 To evaluate implementation outcomes, sports injury prevention researchers have embraced the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework.4–6 While this has heightened awareness of different implementation factors and common pitfalls, most analyses only consider teams’ use of interventions in their original (RCT) form. But programme modifications are common2 7 and failing to assess and analyse them will paint an incomplete picture of real-world adherence. Taking the example of the Copenhagen Adduction Exercise (CAE), under RCT conditions, the programme reduced the risk of groin problems …

中文翻译：

---

改进配方还是破坏肉汤？重塑运动损伤预防中计划调整的看法


多种伤害预防锻炼计划已在随机对照条件下证明有效.1 然而，在现实世界条件下成功实施这些计划是一项重大挑战。有据可查的是，足球队不仅利用随机对照试验 （RCT） 的证据，还利用他们过去的经验、指南和个体球员筛查数据，修改计划以更好地适应他们的具体情况。此外，在现实世界条件下对伤害预防计划的评估表明，增加计划的适应性、变化和个性化可以促进实施工作。修改有效的计划可以可能会增强上下文特异性，但也可能危及保真度。从 RCT 中复制确切的方案会增加实现预期伤害减少的机会，但未能考虑特定实施环境的复杂性并相应地修改干预措施会增加依从性差的风险。为了评估实施结果，运动损伤预防研究人员采用了 Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance （RE-AIM） 框架.4-6 虽然这提高了对不同实施因素和常见陷阱的认识，但大多数分析只考虑团队使用原始 （RCT） 形式的干预措施。但是，计划修改是常见的2 7，如果不进行评估和分析它们，将描绘出现实世界遵守情况的不完整画面。以哥本哈根内收锻炼 （CAE） 为例，在 RCT 条件下，该计划降低了腹股沟问题的风险......