Evidence Hub

Injury Rates, Mechanisms, Risk Factors and Prevention Strategies in Youth Rugby Union: What’s All the Ruck-Us About? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Stephen W. West, I. Shill, S. Bailey, R. A. Syrydiuk, K. Hayden, D. Palmer, A. Black, B. Hagel et al.

Sports Medicine, 2023

11 participants · 41 citations

Abstract

Rugby Union is a collision team sport played globally. Despite this, significant concerns have been raised regarding the sport’s safety, particularly in youth players. Given this, a review of injury rates, risk factors and prevention strategies is required across different youth age groups as well as in males and females. The objective of this systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis was to investigate injury and concussion rates, risk factors and primary prevention strategies in youth rugby. To be included, studies were required to report either rates, risk factors or prevention strategies in youth rugby and to have a randomised controlled trial, quasi-experimental, cohort, case control, or ecological study design. Exclusion criteria included non-peer-reviewed grey literature, conference abstracts, case studies, previous systematic reviews and studies not written in English. Nine databases were searched. The full search strategy and list of sources are available and pre-registered on PROSPERO (Ref: CRD42020208343). Each study was assessed for risk of bias using the Downs and Black quality assessment tool. Meta-analyses were conducted using a DerSimonian Laird random effect model for each age group and sex. Sixty-nine studies were included in this SR. The match injury rates (using a 24-h time-loss definition) were 40.2/1000 match hours (95% CI 13.9–66.5) in males and 69.0/1000 match hours (95% CI 46.8–91.2) in females. Concussion rates were 6.2/1000 player-hours (95% CI…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 11 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free