The term "injury prevention" is misleading at best and idiotic at worst, and I'm guilty of using it. No more. I've realized that injuries are inevitable and, when you describe an intervention as preventative, you're setting yourself and the intervention up for failure.
If you are doing anything even approaching your genetic limits, injuries are not only likely but should be factored into your programming. There should be a series of plans that accommodate continued success in the macro despite setbacks in the micro.
Take something like resistance training for endurance athletes. Often hailed as excellent for injury prevention, with runners being the most injured subset of athlete in the world, you can find article after article on the topic of adding weights to a running program to bulletproof the runner. On a per hour basis in comparison of injury rates in other sports, it is not even close, so runners glom into the idea of prevention in hopes of not curtailing their respective training or competition season.
So we prescribe weightlifting to help prevent injuries, which is not exactly what we are doing; we are actually trying to make the runner more durable through strengthening, which is different. It does not prevent anything. We are just hoping we can make a robust enough organism that it can stave off potential injury long enough to complete a given task.
Guess what? It does not change a thing. Runners still get injured, even following a well designed resistance training program in conjunction with their running program.
We are, at best, mitigating injuries that have not happened yet. See, the advantage to being strong is that you can take a little more abuse than weaker athletes, but you are also more useful even after you do get injured. Strength produces stability and after an injury occurs, there is still enough stability left to have utility. In the words of powerlifter Mark Bell, "Strength is never a weakness." This statement is even truer when you are injured but still have the strength around the damaged area to function normally, or relatively so given your impediment.
Further to the point of using strength to create durability, remember this: weakness is just an injury that has not happened yet.
Even if we accept that there is no true thing as "injury prevention," we still acknowledge that weakness in any form does not a successful athlete make. Correct weakness, reduce injury risk; improve strength, increase durability. Starting to see a pattern here?
But don't fall into the mental trap of thinking it is prevention–there is no such thing. Prevention is a silly concept that will leave you living in a bubble or doing nothing at all for fear of getting hurt. Injury mitigation is the goal.
For instance, here is a video of me squatting. It's a single set of five repetitions with 185 pounds, which is 20 pounds over my body weight for those of you keeping score at home. I'm walking around on a broken second metatarsal in my right foot in this clip and, as you will no doubt notice, I'm without my Aircast. It's not needed in this moment because I have enough general strength in and around my foot to create enough stability to squat.
I concede that the weight I'm using and the rate of speed in which I'm lifting it is not all that impressive. That being said, I am still lifting despite a completely fractured bone in my foot. Even if I'm struggling a little to get it done, I am getting it done. This is the value of strength training.
Just because I can't run does not mean I can't train my running muscles. My previous baseline of strength is allowing me to continue with productive training; where durability failed me, stability has taken over. Even if you can't really prevent injuries, you keep strength training so you can keep training. My goal with resistance training is to make sure no injury ever completely stops me from training in some capacity; it may be inevitable that I'll get injured, but I don't have to come to a complete stop when it happens because of the strength I have built.
I can be inevitable, too.