On average, a professional rugby union player is more likely than not to sustain a concussion after 25 matches
- Rafferty, James, Ranson, Craig, Oatley, Giles, Mostafa, Mohamed, Mathema, Prabhat, Crick, Tom, Moore, Isabel
- Authors: Rafferty, James , Ranson, Craig , Oatley, Giles , Mostafa, Mohamed , Mathema, Prabhat , Crick, Tom , Moore, Isabel
- Date: 2019
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: British Journal of Sports Medicine Vol. 53, no. 15 (2019), p. 969-973
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: To investigate concussion injury rates, the likelihood of sustaining concussion relative to the number of rugby union matches and the risk of subsequent injury following concussion. A four-season (2012/2013-2015/2016) prospective cohort study of injuries in professional level (club and international) rugby union. Incidence (injuries/1000 player-match-hours), severity (days lost per injury) and number of professional matches conferring a large risk of concussion were determined. The risk of injury following concussion was assessed using a survival model. Concussion incidence increased from 7.9 (95% CI 5.1 to 11.7) to 21.5 injuries/1000 player-match-hours (95% CI 16.4 to 27.6) over the four seasons for combined club and international rugby union. Concussion severity was unchanged over time (median: 9 days). Players were at a greater risk of sustaining a concussion than not after an exposure of 25 matches (95% CI 19 to 32). Injury risk (any injury) was 38% greater (HR 1.38 95% CI 1.21 to 1.56) following concussion than after a non-concussive injury. Injuries to the head and neck (HR 1.34 95% CI 1.06 to 1.70), upper limb (HR 1.59 95% CI 1.19 to 2.12), pelvic region (HR 2.07 95% CI 1.18 to 3.65) and the lower limb (HR 1.60 95% CI 1.21 to 2.10) were more likely following concussion than after a non-concussive injury. Concussion incidence increased, while severity remained unchanged, during the 4 years of this study. Playing more than 25 matches in the 2015/2016 season meant that sustaining concussion was more likely than not sustaining concussion. The 38% greater injury risk after concussive injury (compared with non-concussive injury) suggests return to play protocols warrant investigation.
- Authors: Rafferty, James , Ranson, Craig , Oatley, Giles , Mostafa, Mohamed , Mathema, Prabhat , Crick, Tom , Moore, Isabel
- Date: 2019
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: British Journal of Sports Medicine Vol. 53, no. 15 (2019), p. 969-973
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: To investigate concussion injury rates, the likelihood of sustaining concussion relative to the number of rugby union matches and the risk of subsequent injury following concussion. A four-season (2012/2013-2015/2016) prospective cohort study of injuries in professional level (club and international) rugby union. Incidence (injuries/1000 player-match-hours), severity (days lost per injury) and number of professional matches conferring a large risk of concussion were determined. The risk of injury following concussion was assessed using a survival model. Concussion incidence increased from 7.9 (95% CI 5.1 to 11.7) to 21.5 injuries/1000 player-match-hours (95% CI 16.4 to 27.6) over the four seasons for combined club and international rugby union. Concussion severity was unchanged over time (median: 9 days). Players were at a greater risk of sustaining a concussion than not after an exposure of 25 matches (95% CI 19 to 32). Injury risk (any injury) was 38% greater (HR 1.38 95% CI 1.21 to 1.56) following concussion than after a non-concussive injury. Injuries to the head and neck (HR 1.34 95% CI 1.06 to 1.70), upper limb (HR 1.59 95% CI 1.19 to 2.12), pelvic region (HR 2.07 95% CI 1.18 to 3.65) and the lower limb (HR 1.60 95% CI 1.21 to 2.10) were more likely following concussion than after a non-concussive injury. Concussion incidence increased, while severity remained unchanged, during the 4 years of this study. Playing more than 25 matches in the 2015/2016 season meant that sustaining concussion was more likely than not sustaining concussion. The 38% greater injury risk after concussive injury (compared with non-concussive injury) suggests return to play protocols warrant investigation.
International consensus statement on injury surveillance in cricket : A 2016 update
- Orchard, John, Ranson, Craig, Olivier, Benita, Dhillon, Mandeep, Gray, Janine, Langley, Ben, Mansingh, Akshai, Moore, Isabel, Murphy, Ian, Patricios, Jon, Alwar, Thiagarajan, Clark, Christopher, Harrop, Brett, Khan, Hussain, Kountouris, Alex, Macphail, Mairi, Mount, Stephen, Mupotaringa, Anesu, Newman, David, O'Reilly, Kieran, Peirce, Nicholas, Saleem, Sohail, Shackel, Dayle, Stretch, Richard, Finch, Caroline
- Authors: Orchard, John , Ranson, Craig , Olivier, Benita , Dhillon, Mandeep , Gray, Janine , Langley, Ben , Mansingh, Akshai , Moore, Isabel , Murphy, Ian , Patricios, Jon , Alwar, Thiagarajan , Clark, Christopher , Harrop, Brett , Khan, Hussain , Kountouris, Alex , Macphail, Mairi , Mount, Stephen , Mupotaringa, Anesu , Newman, David , O'Reilly, Kieran , Peirce, Nicholas , Saleem, Sohail , Shackel, Dayle , Stretch, Richard , Finch, Caroline
- Date: 2016
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: British Journal of Sports Medicine Vol. 50, no. 20 (2016), p. 1245-1251
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: Cricket was the first sport to publish recommended methods for injury surveillance in 2005. Since then, there have been changes to the nature of both cricket and injury surveillance. Researchers representing the major cricket playing nations met to propose changes to the previous recommendations, with an agreed voting block of 14. It was decided that 10 of 14 votes (70%) were required to add a new definition element and 11 of 14 (80%) were required to amend a previous definition. In addition to the previously agreed 'Match time-loss' injury, definitions of 'General time-loss', 'Medical presentation', 'Player-reported' and 'Imaging-abnormality' injuries are now provided. Further, new injury incidence units of match injuries per 1000 player days, and annual injuries per 100 players per year are recommended. There was a shift towards recommending a greater number of possible definitions, due to differing contexts and foci of cricket research (eg, professional vs amateur; injury surveillance systems vs specific injury category studies). It is recommended that researchers use and report as many of the definitions as possible to assist both comparisons between studies within cricket and with those from other sports.
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »