Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Efficacy of a movement control injury prevention programme in adult men's community rugby union: a cluster randomised controlled trial [with consumer summary]
Attwood MJ, Roberts SP, Trewartha G, England ME, Stokes KA
British Journal of Sports Medicine 2018 Mar;52(6):368-374
clinical trial
4/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: No; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

BACKGROUND: Exercise programmes aimed at reducing injury have been shown to be efficacious for some non-collision sports, but evidence in adult men's collision sports such as rugby union is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of a movement control injury prevention exercise programme for reducing match injuries in adult men's community rugby union players. METHODS: 856 clubs were invited to participate in this prospective cluster randomised (single-blind) controlled trial where clubs were the unit of randomisation. 81 volunteered and were randomly assigned (intervention/control). A 42-week exercise programme was followed throughout the season. The control programme reflected 'normal practice' exercises, whereas the intervention focused on proprioception, balance, cutting, landing and resistance exercises. Outcome measures were match injury incidence and burden for: (1) all >= 8 days time-loss injuries and (2) targeted (lower limb, shoulder, head and neck, excluding fractures and lacerations) >= 8 days time-loss injuries. RESULTS: Poisson regression identified no clear effects on overall injury outcomes. A likely beneficial difference in targeted injury incidence (rate ratio (RR), 90% CI 0.6, 0.4 to 1.0) was identified, with a 40% reduction in lower-limb incidence (RR, 90% CI 0.6, 0.4 to 1.0) and a 60% reduction in concussion incidence (RR, 90% CI 0.4, 0.2 to 0.7) in the intervention group. Comparison between arms for clubs with highest compliance (>= median compliance) demonstrated very likely beneficial 60% reductions in targeted injury incidence (RR, 90% CI 0.4, 0.2 to 0.8) and targeted injury burden (RR, 90% CI 0.4, 0.2 to 0.7). CONCLUSIONS: The movement control injury prevention programme resulted in likely beneficial reductions in lower-limb injuries and concussion. Higher intervention compliance was associated with reduced targeted injury incidence and burden.
Reproduced with permission from the BMJ Publishing Group.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help