4.6 Article

Injury risks associated with tackling in rugby union

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE
Volume 44, Issue 3, Pages 159-167

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bjsm.2008.050864

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. International Rugby Board (Dublin)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To examine factors associated with tackles in rugby union and to assess their impact on the risk of injury. Design Two-season (2003/2004 and 2005/2006) prospective cohort design with video analysis. Setting 13 English Premiership clubs. Participants 645 players. Main outcome measure RR (95% CI) calculated by comparing the frequency of occurrence of risk factors in a cohort of players injured during tackles with their frequency of occurrence in tackles in general play. Risk factors Playing position; player's speed, impact force, head position, head/neck flexion and body region struck in the tackle; sequence, direction and type of tackle; and location and type of injury. Results High-speed going into the tackle, high impact force, collisions and contact with a player's head/neck were identified as significant (p<0.01) risk factors for ball carriers (BCs) and tacklers. Midfield backs were significantly (p<0.01) more prone to injury when tackling than other players. Relatively few tacklers were penalised by referees for collision tackles (general play: 2.0%; injured players: 3.3%) and tackles above the line of the shoulder (general play: 5.9%; injured players: 16.7%). Conclusions Advice in national and international injury prevention programmes for reducing the risk of injury in tackles is strongly supported by the results obtained from this study. These programmes should be reviewed, however, to provide specific advice for each type of tackle. Stricter implementation of the Laws of Rugby relating to collisions and tackles above the line of the shoulder may reduce the number of head/neck injuries sustained by BCs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available