This meta-analysis confirms match injury incidence rates in professional Rugby Union can be considered high in comparison with other team sports, but similar to other collision sports. In order to markedly reduce overall injury burden, efforts should target lower-limb injury prevention strategies and technique during contact, as these may render the largest effect.

The aim of this study was to assess the physical demands of elite English rugby union match-play. Player movements were captured by five distributed video cameras and then reconstructed on a two-dimensional plane representing the pitch. Movements based on speeds were categorized as standing, walking, jogging, and medium-intensity running (low-intensity activity), and high-intensity running, sprinting, and static exertion (scrummaging, rucking, mauling, and tackling) (high-intensity activity). Position groups were defined as forwards (tight and loose) and backs (inside and outside). Backs travelled more total distance than forwards (6127 m, s=724 vs. 5581 m, s=692; P<0.05) and greater distances in walking (2351 m, s=287 vs. 1928 m, s=2342; P<0.001) and high-intensity running (448 m, s=149 vs. 298 m, s=107; P<0.05). Forwards performed more high-intensity activity than backs (9:09 min:s, s=1:39 vs. 3:04 min:s, s=1:01; P<0.001), which was attributable to more time spent in static exertion (7:56 min:s, s=1:56 vs. 1:18 min:s, s=0:30; P<0.001), although backs spent more time in high-intensity running (0:52 min:s, s=0:19 vs. 1:19 min:s, s=0:26; P=0.004). Players travelled a greater distance in the first 10 min compared with 50-60 and 70-80 min, but there was no difference in the amount of high-intensity activity performed during consecutive 10-min periods during match-play. These results show the differing physical demands between forwards and backs with no evident deterioration in high-intensity activity performed during match-play.

BackgroundInjury risk in youth rugby has received much attention, highlighting the importance of establishing evidence-based injury reduction strategies.AimTo determine the efficacy of a movement control exercise programme in reducing injuries in youth rugby players and to investigate the effect of programme dose on injury measures.MethodsIn a cluster-randomised controlled trial, 40 independent schools (118 teams, 3188 players aged 14–18 years) were allocated to receive either the intervention or a reference programme, both of which were to be delivered by school coaches. The intervention comprised balance training, whole-body resistance training, plyometric training, and controlled rehearsal of landing and cutting manoeuvres. Time-loss (>24 hours) injuries arising from school rugby matches were recorded by coaches and medical staff.Results441 time-loss match injuries (intervention, 233; control, 208) were reported across 15 938 match exposure-hours (intervention, 9083; control, 6855). Intention-to-treat results indicated unclear effects of trial arm on overall match injury incidence (rate ratio (RR)=0.85, 90% confidence limits 0.61 to 1.17), although clear reductions were evident in the intervention arm for concussion incidence (RR=0.71, 0.48 to 1.05). When trial arm comparisons were limited to teams who had completed three or more weekly programme sessions on average, clear reductions in overall match injury incidence (RR=0.28, 0.14 to 0.51) and concussion incidence (RR=0.41, 0.17 to 0.99) were noted in the intervention group.ConclusionA preventive movement control exercise programme can reduce match injury outcomes, including concussion, in schoolboy rugby players when compared with a standardised control exercise programme, although to realise the greatest effects players should complete the programme at least three times per week.

Players had an increased risk of injury if they had high 1-wk cumulative loads (1245 AU) or large week-to-week changes in TL (1069 AU). In addition, a U-shaped relationship was observed for 4-wk cumulative loads, with an apparent increase in risk associated with higher loads (>8651 AU). These measures should therefore be monitored to inform injury-risk-reduction strategies.

Overall, the incidence of injury for youth rugby was lower than for previous studies in senior rugby, but injury patterns (location, type) and causes were similar. The study confirmed that match injury incidence was significantly greater in elite academy youth rugby union than schools rugby. The results suggest that the specific focus for injury risk management in youth rugby should be on players' tackle technique and prevention strategies for knee and shoulder injuries.