Match and Training Load Exposure and Time-Loss Incidence in Elite Rugby Union Players

Cousins, Ben E.W.; Morris, John G.; Sunderland, Caroline; Bennett, Anthony M.; Shahtahmassebi, Golnaz; Cooper, Simon B.

doi:10.3389/fphys.2019.01413

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Body load data showed high levels of G force are sustained during tackling and scrummaging. Cousins et al [ 66 ] 89 professional rugby union players from the top two leagues in England. STATSport Apex Data were collected from two GPS tracking devices (5 and 10 Hz) over 2 seasons.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of Global Positioning and Accelerometer Systems in Age-Grade and Senior Rugby Union: A Systematic Review

Bridgeman

Gill

2021

Sports Med - Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Global positioning systems (GPS) imbedded with accelerometer systems (AS) are used in rugby union (RU) to collect information on absolute and relative distances, distances in different speed zones, high-speed running (HSR) distances, repeated high-intensity efforts (RHIE) and collisions and impacts. This information can be used to monitor match play which can then be used to plan training sessions. The objective of this review was to conduct a systematic review of studies which have reported the use of GPS and AS. Methods A systematic review of the use of GPS and AS in both age-grade and senior rugby was conducted. The authors systematically searched electronic databases from January 2010 until March 2020. Keywords included rugby union, GPS, global position* and microtechnology. Results A total of 51 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. There was a total of 34 studies utilising GPS and AS in senior RU players (mean ± SD; age 26.2 ± 1.9 years; height 185.7 ± 2.6 cm; mass 101.3 ± 4.2 kg) and 17 studies in age-grade RU players (mean ± SD; age 17.6 ± 1.5 years; height 182.1 ± 3.3 cm; mass 87.1 ± 8.6 kg). The results of this review highlighted that there are differences between backs and forwards and within these positions in these groups during both match play and training sessions. The backs covered greater total absolute, relative and HSR distance compared to forwards. Forwards are involved in more collisions and impacts than backs. When investigating the most intense periods of match play, studies in this review highlighted that the demands during these periods outweigh the average demands of the game. It was proposed that a rolling average over different time epochs is the best way to assess this and ensure that the most intense periods of play are assessed and monitored. Conclusions The information highlighted in this review can be used to help coaches assess performances in match play, allow them to plan appropriate training sessions and monitor training load.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of Global Positioning and Accelerometer Systems in Age-Grade and Senior Rugby Union: A Systematic Review

Bridgeman

Gill

2021

Sports Med - Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In rugby union, the risk of injury is high compared with that of other team sports (81 per 1000 match hours [16]) and therefore modifiable risk factors such as training load offer a potentially useful method for injury risk mitigation. While little evidence exists in rugby union as to the utility of the ACWR [17,18], establishing the extent to which methodological parameters could be influencing the link between the ACWR and injury risk in this setting is prudent. Importantly, it is well established that injury etiology is multifactorial in nature [19], and therefore when examining the link between training load and injury, other well known risk factors must be considered.…”

Section: Training Load and Injury Risk In Elite Rugby Union: The Largmentioning

confidence: 99%

Training Load and Injury Risk in Elite Rugby Union: The Largest Investigation to Date

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Training load monitoring has grown in recent years with the acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) widely used to aggregate data to inform decision-making on injury risk. Several methods have been described to calculate the ACWR and numerous methodological issues have been raised. Therefore, this study examined the relationship between the ACWR and injury in a sample of 696 players from 13 professional rugby clubs over two seasons for 1718 injuries of all types and a further analysis of 383 soft tissue injuries specifically. Of the 192 comparisons undertaken for both injury groups, 40% (all injury) and 31% (soft tissue injury) were significant. Furthermore, there appeared to be no calculation method that consistently demonstrated a relationship with injury. Some calculation methods supported previous work for a “sweet spot” in injury risk, while a substantial number of methods displayed no such relationship. This study is the largest to date to have investigated the relationship between the ACWR and injury risk and demonstrates that there appears to be no consistent association between the two. This suggests that alternative methods of training load aggregation may provide more useful information, but these should be considered in the wider context of other established risk factors.

show abstract

“…Only two studies [34,42] included in this review used the EWMA model and suggested that the EWMA model was a better alternative to rolling averages for assessing injury risk. Some studies show that while both models demonstrate significant associations between ACWR and injury risk [49][50][51], rolling ACWRs may underestimate the injury risk at higher ACWR ranges [49,50,52,53], while others suggest that there are no differences between the rolling averages and the EWMA methods [51]. Studies included in this review support both methods, but when directly compared, the EWMA model shows greater sensitivity.…”

Section: How To Best Calculate the Acwr? The Decision Requires Contextmentioning

confidence: 79%

Is the Acute: Chronic Workload Ratio (ACWR) Associated with Risk of Time-Loss Injury in Professional Team Sports? A Systematic Review of Methodology, Variables and Injury Risk in Practical Situations

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Is the acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) associated with risk of timeloss injury in professional team sports? A systematic review of methodology, variables and injury risk in practical situations ABSTRACT Background The acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) is an index of the acute workload relative to the cumulative chronic workloads. The monitoring of physical workloads using the ACWR has emerged and been hypothesized as a useful tool for coaches and athletes to optimize performance while aiming to reduce the risk of potentially preventable load-driven injuries.Objectives Our goal was to describe characteristics of the ACWR and investigate the association of the ACWR with the risk of time-loss injuries in adult elite team sport athletes.Data sources Pubmed, EMBASE and grey literature databases; inception to May 2019. Eligibility criteriaLongitudinal studies that assess the relationship of the ACWR and time-loss injury risk in adult professional or elite team sports. MethodsWe summarized the population characteristics, workload metrics and ACWR calculation methods. For each workload metric, we plotted the risk estimates for the ACWR in isolation, or when combined with chronic workloads. Methodological quality was assessed using a modified version of the Downs and Black scale.Results Twenty studies comprising 2375 injuries from 1234 athletes (all male and mean age of 24 years old) from different sports were included. Internal (65%) and external loads (70%) were collected in more than half of the studies and the sRPE and total distance were the most commonly collected metrics. The ACWR was commonly calculated using the coupled method (95%), 1:4 weekly blocks (95%) and subsequent week injury lag (80%). There were 14 different binning methods with almost none of the studies using the same binning categories. ConclusionThe majority of studies suggest that athletes are at greater risk of sustaining a timeloss injury when the ACWR is higher relative to a lower or moderate ACWR. The heterogenous 4 methodological approaches reflects the wide range of sports studied and the differing demands of these activities, but also limits the strength of recommendations. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017067585 Key Points• A higher acute:chronic workload ratio in relation to a lower or moderate acute:chronic workload ratio suggests a greater risk of sustaining a time-loss injury. No clear association was observed for a low acute:chronic workload ratio in terms of injury risk.• A low chronic load combined with a high acute:chronic workload ratio may increase the risk of injury, although the number of studies addressing these combinations are limited.• The review highlighted a wide variation in methodologies, especially in regard the definitions for workload categories. Researchers should clearly report and justify the methods they use for data structuring and analysis. Practitioners should be aware of the methodological divergence associated with research on ACWR and injuries when interpreting published studies and adapting to the...

show abstract

Match and Training Load Exposure and Time-Loss Incidence in Elite Rugby Union Players

Cited by 14 publications

References 32 publications

The Use of Global Positioning and Accelerometer Systems in Age-Grade and Senior Rugby Union: A Systematic Review

The Use of Global Positioning and Accelerometer Systems in Age-Grade and Senior Rugby Union: A Systematic Review

Training Load and Injury Risk in Elite Rugby Union: The Largest Investigation to Date

Is the Acute: Chronic Workload Ratio (ACWR) Associated with Risk of Time-Loss Injury in Professional Team Sports? A Systematic Review of Methodology, Variables and Injury Risk in Practical Situations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About