Influence of playing rugby on long-term brain health following retirement: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Abstract

ObjectivesThe aim of this review was to systematically investigate long-term brain health in retired rugby players.MethodsSix databases were systematically searched from inception to January 2018 using Medical Subject Headings and keywords. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion. Cross-sectional studies of living retired male or female rugby players in which at least one cognitive test was used as an outcome measure were included. Data extraction was performed using Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Methodological quality was assessed independently by two reviewers using the Downs and Black methodological quality tool.ResultsThis review yielded six studies with an overall methodological quality of ‘moderate’. A total of 672 male retired rugby players (mean ages of 38–52 years) were included in this review. Three studies investigated neuropsychological functioning in retired rugby players in comparison with controls, with no significant evidence of decreased performance in the majority of tests when compared with controls. Five out of the six studies explored self-reported measures of cognition. Three studies compared retired rugby players to controls, one of which found significantly increased subjective cognitive complaints among retired rugby players. The other two studies found that persistent postconcussion symptoms were associated with a higher number of self-reported concussions. Two studies reported decreased fine motor control in retired rugby players in comparison with controls. Neurometabolites and electrophysiological changes were explored by two studies, with minimal and non-significant findings.ConclusionsOverall findings are mixed. Methodological biases reduce the overall study quality and limited the conclusions that can be drawn. Findings of decreased fine motor control in retired athletes may be influenced by lack of controlling for evidence of upper limb musculoskeletal injuries. While some studies show evidence of reduced cognitive function among former athletes, the results are not significantly lower than population norms. Cognitive findings from this review are inconsistent within and across study cohorts and are biased towards positive findings when self-report methods were selected. Current evidence suggests that large gaps remain in the understanding of the cause-and-effect relationships between playing rugby and long-term brain health in retired players.

Force experienced by the head during heading is influenced more by speed than the mechanical properties of the football

“…1,3 However, there is clearly a need for prospective longitudinal studies taking into account concussion history and overall head impact exposure to draw this conclusion. 31 Additionally, there is a need for more research on the head impact exposure from heading in football at youth, amateur and elite level.…”

The relationships between rugby union and health: a scoping review protocol

“…The majority of this research is performed in professional men’s rugby, though data highlight similar patterns in community, women’s and youth rugby 13–17. Reported longer-term health outcomes of rugby include neurocognitive deficits post-retirement,18 decreased neuropsychological performance19 and increased rates of osteoarthritis,20 though findings are not consistently adverse, with research also demonstrating no differences in mental health and social or work functioning after injury between retired international rugby players and controls 21…”

Systematic review and quality ranking of studies of two phthalate metabolites and anogenital distance, bone health, inflammation, and oxidative stress

“…Given that the possible number of points varies by study design, a score percentage was calculated (total points given out of total possible points) for each paper. Studies with scores of 75% or higher were considered to be higher quality than studies with scores less than 75% (Cunningham et al 2018).…”