Kinematics of Rugby Tackling: A Pilot Study With 3-dimensional Motion Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although improper tackling technique in rugby can affect the outcome of the tackle and lead to head, neck, and shoulder injuries, the effects of the height of the tackle or the side of the leading leg at the time of impact have not been investigated. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose was to characterize the trunk orientation at impact during various tackles. It was hypothesized that 3-dimensional motion analysis would be able to capture the critical kinematic differences in the 4 types of tackles studied. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: A total of 66 tackles on a tackle bag were recorded among 13 elite rugby players. Four types of tackles were evaluated: the normal shoulder tackle, in which the tackler's dominant shoulder made impact while the leading foot was on the same side as that shoulder; the low tackle, in which the tackler targeted the lower portion of the tackle bag; the opposite-leg tackle, in which the tackler's leading leg was on the opposite side as the shoulder making impact; and the low and opposite-leg tackle, which was a combination of the previous 2 types of tackles. The orientation of the trunk at impact was calculated, and 2-way repeated-measures analyses of variance were used to compare the characteristics of these tackles. RESULTS: Trunk inclination at impact was lower in the low tackle than in the normal tackle ( P < .01), regardless of the side of the leading leg. Trunk bending to the side of the impacted shoulder was lower in the opposite-leg tackle ( P < .01), and these findings were more significant in the normal-height tackles ( P < .01). Trunk rotation to the side of the impacted shoulder was lower in the opposite-leg tackles ( P < .01) and more significant in the lower-height tackles ( P = .03). CONCLUSION: The 3-dimensional motion capture system was effective in investigating the kinematics of rugby tackling. The kinematics in the low and opposite-leg tackles were significantly different from those in the normal shoulder tackle, which may affect tackle performance and the possible risk of contact injury. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: When a rugby coach provides tackling instructions to players, it is advantageous to have information about the kinematics of different types of tackles.

Tackler's head position relative to the ball carrier is highly correlated with head and neck injuries in rugby.

OBJECTIVES: To characterise the tackler's head position during one-on-one tackling in rugby and to determine the incidence of head, neck and shoulder injuries through analysis of game videos, injury records and a questionnaire completed by the tacklers themselves. METHODS: We randomly selected 28 game videos featuring two university teams in competitions held in 2015 and 2016. Tackles were categorised according to tackler's head position. The 'pre-contact phase' was defined; its duration and the number of steps taken by the ball carrier prior to a tackle were evaluated. RESULTS: In total, 3970 tackles, including 317 (8.0%) with the tackler's head incorrectly positioned (ie, in front of the ball carrier) were examined. Thirty-two head, neck or shoulder injuries occurred for an injury incidence of 0.8% (32/3970). The incidence of injury in tackles with incorrect head positioning was 69.4/1000 tackles; the injury incidence with correct head positioning (ie, behind or to one side of the ball carrier) was 2.7/1000 tackles. Concussions, neck injuries, 'stingers' and nasal fractures occurred significantly more often during tackles with incorrect head positioning than during tackles with correct head positioning. Significantly fewer steps were taken before tackles with incorrect head positioning that resulted in injury than before tackles that did not result in injury. CONCLUSION: Tackling with incorrect head position relative to the ball carrier resulted in a significantly higher incidence of concussions, neck injuries, stingers and nasal fractures than tackling with correct head position. Tackles with shorter duration and distance before contact resulted in more injuries.

Video Analysis of Primary Shoulder Dislocations in Rugby Tackles.

BACKGROUND: Characteristics of rugby tackles that lead to primary anterior shoulder dislocation remain unclear. PURPOSE: To clarify the characteristics of tackling that lead to shoulder dislocation and to assess the correlation between the mechanism of injury and morphological damage of the glenoid. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Eleven elite rugby players who sustained primary anterior shoulder dislocation due to one-on-one tackling between 2001 and 2014 were included. Using an assessment system, the tackler's movement, posture, and shoulder and head position were evaluated in each phase of tackling. Based on 3-dimensional computed tomography, the glenoid of the affected shoulder was classified into 3 types: intact, erosion, and bone defect. Orientation of the glenoid defect and presence of Hill-Sachs lesion were also evaluated. RESULTS: Eleven tackles that led to primary shoulder dislocation were divided into hand, arm, and shoulder tackle types based on the site at which the tackler contacted the ball carrier initially. In hand and arm tackles, the tackler's shoulder joint was forcibly moved to horizontal abduction by the impact of his upper limb, which appeared to result from an inappropriate approach to the ball carrier. In shoulder tackles, the tackler's head was lowered and was in front of the ball carrier at impact. There was no significant correlation between tackle types and the characteristics of bony lesions of the shoulder. CONCLUSION: Although the precise mechanism of primary anterior shoulder dislocation could not be estimated from this single-view analysis, failure of individual tackling leading to injury is not uniform and can be caused by 2 main factors: failure of approach followed by an extended arm position or inappropriate posture of the tackler at impact, such as a lowered head in front of the opponent. These findings indicate that injury mechanisms should be assessed for each type of tackle, as it is unknown whether external force to the glenoid is different in each mechanism during shoulder dislocation.

Incidence of Stingers in Young Rugby Players.

BACKGROUND: A stinger is a type of neurapraxia of the cervical roots or brachial plexus and represents a reversible peripheral nerve injury. The incidence of and major risk factors for stingers among young rugby players remain uninvestigated. PURPOSE: To investigate the incidence, symptoms, and intrinsic risk factors for stingers in elite rugby union teams of young players. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive epidemiology study. METHODS: A total of 569 male rugby players, including 358 players from 7 high school teams and 211 players from 2 university teams, were investigated using self-administered preseason and postseason questionnaires. RESULTS: The prevalence of a history of stingers was 33.9% (95% CI, 30.3-37.9), and 20.9% (119/569) of players experienced at least 1 episode of a stinger during the season (34.2 [95% CI, 26.2-42.1] events per 1000 player-hours of match exposure). The reinjury rate for stingers per season was 37.3% (95% CI, 30.4-44.2). Using the multivariate Poisson regression method, a history of stingers in the previous season and the grade and position of the player were found to be risk factors for stingers during the current season. The mean severity of injury was 2.9 days, with 79.3% (191/241) of the players not losing any time from playing after sustaining a stinger injury and 5.8% (14/241) of the players recovering within more than 14 days. The most frequent symptom was numbness in the unilateral upper extremity, and the most severe symptom was weakness of grasping (mean severity, 6 days). A logistic regression analysis indicated that a history of stingers in the previous season and an injury with more than 3 symptoms, especially motor weakness, were correlated with the severity of injury. CONCLUSION: Young rugby players with a history of stingers have a significantly high rate of repeat injuries. Although nearly 80% of the players experienced only minimal (0-1 day) time loss injuries, neurological deficits sometimes last beyond 1 month. A history of stingers was identified to be the strongest risk factor for injuries and for lasting symptoms. This information may be useful for planning the proper treatment for stingers in young rugby players.

Incidence of and risk factors for traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: an epidemiologic study in high-school rugby players.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of reinjuries due to glenohumeral instability and the major risk factors for primary anterior shoulder dislocation in youth rugby players have been unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence, mechanisms, and intrinsic risk factors of shoulder dislocation in elite high-school rugby union teams during the 2012 season. METHODS: A total of 378 male rugby players from 7 high-school teams were investigated by use of self-administered preseason and postseason questionnaires. RESULTS: The prevalence of a history of shoulder dislocation was 14.8%, and there were 21 events of primary shoulder dislocation of the 74 overall shoulder injuries that were sustained during the season (3.2 events per 1000 player-hours of match exposure). During the season, 54.3% of the shoulders with at least one episode of shoulder dislocation had reinjury. This study also indicated that the persistence of glenohumeral instability might affect the player's self-assessed condition, regardless of the incidence during the current season. By a multivariate logistic regression method, a history of shoulder dislocation on the opposite side before the season was found to be a risk factor for contralateral primary shoulder dislocation (odds ratio, 3.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-9.97; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: High-school rugby players with a history of shoulder dislocation are not playing at full capacity and also have a significant rate of reinjury as well as a high risk of dislocating the other shoulder. These findings may be helpful in deciding on the proper treatment of primary anterior shoulder dislocation in young rugby players.

Do stingers affect scapular kinematics in rugby players?

BACKGROUND: Scapular dyskinesis is observed in subjects with pathologic conditions of the shoulder; however, there is limited information about the factors related to scapular dyskinesis among participants in rugby. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence, reliability, and relationships between scapular dyskinesis and variables related to the shoulder in high-school rugby players. METHODS: A total of 164 Japanese high-school rugby players were evaluated with questionnaires, physical examinations, and a video analysis during their preseason. After evaluation of the inter-rater reliability of a classification of scapular dyskinesis, the outcomes were analyzed to assess the relationships between scapular dyskinesis and other variables during the preseason. The data were assessed with a logistic regression analysis calculating the odds ratios (OR). RESULTS: The inter-rater reliability among 3 blinded observers based on the Fleiss κ value and percentage agreement was .52 and 79.0%, respectively, which indicates that the method is moderately reliable. Scapular dyskinesis was identified in 16 (10.1%) shoulders among 159 players, with type I being prominent. A multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that a type I dyskinesis was significantly associated with a past history of stingers with projected pain to the affected side of the shoulder (OR, 3.7) and the player's competitive grade at the time of the survey (OR, 3.9). CONCLUSIONS: Scapular dyskinesis is significantly associated with a past history of stingers. This suggests that stingers are a causative factor of scapular dyskinesis in the rugby population. Our method of evaluating scapular dyskinesis in collision athletes exhibits moderate reliability.