Skip Navigation LinksHome > May 2007 - Volume 17 - Issue 3 > Consensus Statement on Injury Definitions and Data Collectio...
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine:
doi: 10.1097/JSM.0b013e31803220b3
Original Article: Thematic Issue

Consensus Statement on Injury Definitions and Data Collection Procedures for Studies of Injuries in Rugby Union

Fuller, C W*; Molloy, M G†; Bagate, C‡; Bahr, R§; Brooks, J HM¶; Donson, H∥; Kemp, S PT¶; McCrory, P**; McIntosh, A S††; Meeuwisse, W H‡‡; Quarrie, K L§§; Raftery, M¶¶; Wiley, P∥∥

Free Access
Article Outline
Collapse Box

Author Information

From the *University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom; †International Rugby Board, Dublin, Ireland; ‡Fédération Française de Rugby, Paris, France; §Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center, Oslo, Norway; ¶Rugby Football Union, Twickenham, United Kingdom; ∥South African Rugby Union, Newlands, South Africa; **University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; ††University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada; §§New Zealand Rugby Football Union, Wellington, New Zealand; ¶¶Australian Rugby Union, Sydney, Australia; and ∥∥Rugby Canada, Richmond Hill, Canada.

Submitted for publication October 24, 2006; accepted November 25, 2006.

Collapse Box

Abstract

Wide variations in the definitions and methodologies used for studies of injuries in rugby union have created inconsistencies in reported data and made interstudy comparisons of results difficult. The International Rugby Board established a Rugby Injury Consensus Group (RICG) to agree on appropriate definitions and methodologies to standardize the recording of injuries and reporting of studies in rugby union. The RICG reviewed the consensus definitions and methodologies previously published for football (soccer) at a meeting in Dublin to assess their suitability for and application to rugby union. Following this meeting, iterative draft statements were prepared and circulated to members of the RICG for comment; a follow-up meeting was arranged in Dublin at which time all definitions and procedures were finalized. At this stage, all authors confirmed their agreement with the consensus statement. The agreed-on document was presented to and approved by the International Rugby Board Council.

Agreement was reached on definitions for injury, recurrent injury, nonfatal catastrophic injury, and training and match exposures together with criteria for classifying injuries in terms of severity, location, type, diagnosis, and causation. The definitions and methodology presented in this consensus statement for rugby union are similar to those proposed for football. Adoption of the proposals presented in this consensus statement should ensure that more consistent and comparable results will be obtained from studies of injuries within rugby union.

Back to Top | Article Outline

INTRODUCTION

Wide variations in the definitions and methodologies used for investigations of injuries in rugby union have created inconsistencies in reported data, which has in turn limited the value of individual studies and severely restricted opportunities for making interstudy comparisons of results. Recent consensus statements on injury definitions and procedures for cricket1 and football (soccer)2 have demonstrated an international recognition of the benefits that are gained from the use of common definitions and methodologies. The aim of this consensus statement is to establish operational definitions and methodologies for studies of injuries in rugby union.

Back to Top | Article Outline

METHOD

A preliminary review of the consensus statement produced for cricket1 identified that these proposals were cricket-specific and would not translate readily into the rugby union environment. The consensus statement from football,2 however, showed similarities with definitions and methodologies previously used in peer-reviewed publications of studies of rugby union injuries. The International Rugby Board (iRB) Medical Advisory Committee, therefore, established a Rugby Injury Consensus Group (RICG) to make a detailed assessment of the methodology proposed for football and to determine whether these proposals could be adopted within rugby union and, if this was not possible, to develop proposals that were appropriate for rugby union.

The RICG was composed of 7 voting members-namely, the Chief Medical Officer of the iRB, who acted as group Chairman, and representatives of 6 national rugby unions (3 from the Northern and 3 from the Southern Hemisphere). Six nonvoting members with experience in the study of injuries in a range of team sports were co-opted into the group to provide a wider perspective and a greater understanding of the issues involved. Prior to the initial meeting in Dublin, each member of the RICG was provided with a copy of the football consensus statement2 to ensure that they were familiar with the issues to be discussed. The recommendations proposed by Fink et al3 for consensus group working were adopted during a 12 hour meeting. Each definition and methodological issue presented in the football consensus statement was introduced and discussed by the group. Depending on the outcome from these discussions, it was proposed that either the recommendation from the football consensus group should be accepted or alternative options were presented for consideration. Following this meeting, iterative draft consensus statements were prepared and each was circulated to members of the group for comment. A follow-up meeting was held in Dublin to finalize the definitions and procedures presented in this statement. At this stage, all authors confirmed their agreement with the definitions and procedures presented in this consensus statement. The agreed-on document was finally presented to and approved by the International Rugby Board Council.

Back to Top | Article Outline

DISCUSSION

The RICG endorsed the overall philosophy and broadly agreed on the details of the consensus statement presented for football2 but, because of the inherent differences between the games of rugby union and football, it was considered that some changes were required. For clarity, definitions are presented here in the context of rugby union; however, it was not considered necessary to re-present comments on issues where there was agreement with the football statement. Therefore, unless specifically stated to the contrary, it should be assumed that the methodologies and explanatory notes contained in the football consensus statement form an integral part of this consensus statement for rugby union. The following discussion focuses on those issues where the consensus statement for rugby union departs from the statement presented for football. For comparability and ease of cross-referencing between the 2 documents, the issues are presented and discussed in the same order as that used in the football consensus statement.2

Back to Top | Article Outline

DEFINITIONS

Definitions of injury can be broadly categorized into theoretical and operational definitions4: in studies of sports injuries, definitions are normally intended to provide pragmatic or operational criteria for recording cases rather than to provide a theoretical definition of injury. Although there is no generally accepted theoretical definition of an injury because of its dependence on context,4 definitions are broadly based around the concept of “bodily damage caused by a transfer or absence of energy.” This general concept may be helpful for clarifying whether an incident in rugby should be recorded as an injury.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Injury

The following definition of injury was accepted:

Any physical complaint, which was caused by a transfer of energy that exceeded the body's ability to maintain its structural and/or functional integrity, that was sustained by a player during a rugby match or rugby training, irrespective of the need for medical attention or time-loss from rugby activities. An injury that results in a player receiving medical attention is referred to as a “medical-attention” injury and an injury that results in a player being unable to take a full part in future rugby training or match play as a “time-loss” injury.

In rugby union, nonfatal catastrophic injuries are of particular interest; therefore, a third subgroup of reportable injuries was added:

A brain or spinal cord injury that results in permanent (>12 months) severe functional disability is referred to as a “non-fatal catastrophic injury.”

Severe functional disability is defined by the World Health Organization5 as a loss of more than 50% of the capability of the structure.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Recurrent Injury

The definition of recurrent injury was accepted:

An injury of the same type and at the same site as an index injury and which occurs after a player's return to full participation from the index injury. A recurrent injury occurring within 2 months of a player's return to full participation is referred to as an “early recurrence”; one occurring 2 to 12 months after a player's return to full participation as a “late recurrence”; and one occurring more than 12 months after a player's return to full participation as a “delayed recurrence.”

In rugby union studies, however, a sutured laceration that is reopened during a match or training session should be considered to be a recurrence.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Injury Severity

Time (days) lost from competition and practice was accepted as the basis for defining injury severity:

The number of days that have elapsed from the date of injury to the date of the player's return to full participation in team training and availability for match selection.

Injuries should be grouped, therefore, as slight (0-1 days), minimal (2-3 days), mild (4-7 days), moderate (8-28 days), severe (>28 days), “career-ending,” and “nonfatal catastrophic injuries.”

Back to Top | Article Outline
Match Exposure

The definition of match exposure was accepted:

Play between teams from different clubs.

However, in rugby union, it is a common practice for clubs and countries to use competitive matches between “A” and “B” teams as trials for selection purposes. In these cases, “A” and “B” trial teams should be treated as though they were separate clubs and, in the case of fully refereed competitive trial matches between these teams, the exposure should be recorded as match exposure.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Training Exposure

The definition of training exposure was accepted:

Team-based and individual physical activities under the control or guidance of the team's coaching or fitness staff that are aimed at maintaining or improving players' rugby skills or physical condition.

Back to Top | Article Outline

METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES

The proposal that injury surveillance studies should, wherever possible, be prospective cohort studies was endorsed. In practical terms, most injury surveillance studies in rugby union will record “time-loss” and “nonfatal catastrophic” injuries. Because of the physical nature of rugby union and the high number of slight contusions routinely encountered in the game, studies in rugby union will normally only record injuries as “time-loss injuries” if they result in more than 1 day of absence from training, matches, or both. The nature of the game of rugby union means that recording injuries will often be more complex than is the case for football; for example, multiple injury diagnoses from a single event and multiple events (with or without multiple diagnoses) involving the same player in the same game are more common in rugby union.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Interpretation of Injury Definition

Studies should not incorporate mixed definitions of injury; it is anticipated that most studies in rugby union will record “time-loss” injuries. A “blood injury” that requires a player to leave the field of play for treatment under Law 3.11(a) should not be included as an injury in a study unless the player subsequently loses time from training or competition as a result of the injury. If, however, the purpose of a study is to record the incidence of “blood injuries,” then these injuries should be recorded and reported separately from “time-loss” injuries. Examples of how specific incidents should be recorded using the “medical attention” and “time-loss (>1 day severity)” regimens are presented in Table 1.

Table 1
Table 1
Image Tools

Nonfatal catastrophic injuries (permanent severe functional disability) should not include injuries resulting in transient neurologic deficits such as burners/stingers, paresthesias, transient quadriplegia, and cases of concussion where there is full recovery.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Injury Classification

The requirement that injuries should be classified by location, type, body side, and injury event was endorsed.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Location of Injury

The main groupings and categories proposed were accepted with the additional requirement that the category of “thigh injury” should be subdivided into “anterior thigh” and “posterior thigh” injuries.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Type of Injury

The categories proposed for reporting the type of injury sustained were broadly accepted. However, the headings used for the main groupings were subject to slight change and additional categories within these groupings were added to reflect the injury profile in rugby union-namely, injuries to the head, spinal cord, and internal organs. For clarity, the full list of main groupings and categories that should be used in rugby union is shown in Table 2.

Table 2
Table 2
Image Tools
Back to Top | Article Outline
Other Injury Classification Issues

Injuries should be classified as to whether they occurred during a match or training session and whether they were the result of contact with another player or object or were a noncontact injury. For injuries resulting from contact, activities should be recorded as tackling, tackled, maul, ruck, lineout, scrum, collision, or other. It may also be appropriate to record whether the action causing the injury was deemed by the match referee to be a violation of the laws of the game or was deemed by the match referee or citing official to be “dangerous play” (Law 10.4).

Back to Top | Article Outline
Study Population

The RICG endorsed the view that injury surveillance studies should normally include players from more than 1 team and should extend for a minimum period of 1 season or 1 year or for the duration of a major tournament.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Implementation Issues

The format and content of studies should be approved by an appropriate institutional ethics committee, and informed consent should be obtained from all players for their data to be included in the study. The formats of the proforma provided in the football consensus statement2 were accepted as appropriate for use in rugby union. For rugby union, the player's dominant arm should also be identified on the Player's baseline information form because of the importance and higher incidence of upper-limb injuries in rugby union. Appendix A provides an example of an injury form for use within rugby union.

For studies in rugby union that record team match exposure, the total player-match exposure time in hours for a team is given by {NM × PM × DM/60} where NM is the number of team-matches played, PM is the number of players in the team (normally 15), and DM is the duration of the match in minutes (normally 80).

Back to Top | Article Outline
Reporting Data

The RICG endorsed the view that the incidence of match and training injuries should be reported separately; in addition, injury profiles should be reported separately for match and training injuries. If the times of match injuries are recorded, the injuries should be grouped into quarters, which would normally be as follows: first half: 0-20, 21-40+; second half: 41-60, 61-80+ minutes. When available, the official match clock-time should be used for recording the time of injury.

Back to Top | Article Outline

CONCLUSIONS

The definitions and methodology presented in the consensus statement for football were found generally to be appropriate for rugby union. Minor variations in some definitions and procedures were required, however, to reflect specific issues associated with rugby union. The definitions and procedures presented in this consensus statement should improve the quality of data collected and reported in future studies of rugby union injuries. In addition, the adoption of broadly similar definitions and methodologies across sports should enable meaningful intersport comparisons of results to be made. Finally, the definitions and methodologies presented in this consensus statement will form the basis for all future studies of injuries supported by the iRB.

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

1. Orchard JW, Newman D, Stretch R, et al. Methods for injury surveillance in international cricket. Br J Sports Med. 2005;39:e22.

2. Fuller CW, Ekstrand J, Junge A, et al. Consensus statement on injury definitions and data collection procedures in studies of football (soccer) injuries. Br J Sports Med. 2006;40:193-201. Clin J Sports Med. 2006;16:97-106. Scand J Med Sci Sport. 2006;16:83-92.

3. Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, et al. Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Publ Health. 1984;74:979-983.

4. Langley J, Brenner R. What is an injury? Injury Prev. 2004;10:69-71.

5. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health System (ICF). World Health Organization: Geneva; 2001.

Back to Top | Article Outline
APPENDIX A Cited Here...
TABLE. Appendix A. I...
TABLE. Appendix A. I...
Image Tools

Cited By:

This article has been cited 26 time(s).

American Journal of Sports Medicine
Results of 2 Decades of Injury Surveillance and Public Release of Data in the Australian Football League
Orchard, JW; Seward, H; Orchard, JJ
American Journal of Sports Medicine, 41(4): 734-741.
10.1177/0363546513476270
CrossRef
American Journal of Sports Medicine
Match Injuries in English Youth Academy and Schools Rugby Union An Epidemiological Study
Palmer-Green, DS; Stokes, KA; Fuller, CW; England, M; Kemp, SPT; Trewartha, G
American Journal of Sports Medicine, 41(4): 749-755.
10.1177/0363546512473818
CrossRef
American Journal of Epidemiology
Analyses of Injury Count Data: Some Do's and Don'ts
Shrier, I; Steele, RJ; Hanley, J; Rich, B
American Journal of Epidemiology, 170(): 1307-1315.
10.1093/aje/kwp265
CrossRef
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Consensus statement on epidemiological studies of medical conditions in tennis, April 2009
Pluim, BM; Fuller, CW; Batt, ME; Chase, L; Hainline, B; Miller, S; Montalvan, B; Renstrom, P; Stroia, KA; Weber, K; Wood, TO
British Journal of Sports Medicine, 43(): 893-897.
10.1136/bjsm.2009.064915
CrossRef
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Injury risks associated with tackling in rugby union
Fuller, CW; Ashton, T; Brooks, JHM; Cancea, RJ; Hall, J; Kemp, SPT
British Journal of Sports Medicine, 44(3): 159-167.
10.1136/bjsm.2008.050864
CrossRef
Injury Prevention
Risk factors for injury and severe injury in youth ice hockey: a systematic review of the literature
Emery, CA; Hagel, B; Decloe, M; Carly, M
Injury Prevention, 16(2): 113-118.
10.1136/ip.2009.022764
CrossRef
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Injury prevention in paediatric sport-related injuries: a scientific approach
Emery, CA
British Journal of Sports Medicine, 44(1): 64-69.
10.1136/bjsm.2009.068353
CrossRef
Sports Medicine
Match and Training Injuries in Rugby League A Review of Published Studies
King, DA; Hume, PA; Milburn, PD; Guttenbeil, D
Sports Medicine, 40(2): 163-178.

Physical Therapy in Sport
A prospective epidemiological study of injuries to New Zealand premier club rugby union players
Schneiders, AG; Takemura, M; Wassinger, CA
Physical Therapy in Sport, 10(3): 85-90.
10.1016/j.ptsp.2009.05.001
CrossRef
British Medical Bulletin
Injuries, risk factors and prevention initiatives in youth sport
Frisch, A; Croisier, JL; Urhausen, A; Seil, R; Theisen, D
British Medical Bulletin, 92(1): 95-121.
10.1093/bmb/ldp034
CrossRef
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Preventing sports injuries at the national level: time for other nations to follow New Zealand's remarkable success
Orchard, JW
British Journal of Sports Medicine, 42(6): 392-393.
10.1136/bjsm.2008.047472
CrossRef
Injury Prevention
An empirical approach for defining acceptable levels of risk: a case study in team sports
Fuller, CW; Ward, CJ
Injury Prevention, 14(4): 256-261.
10.1136/ip.2008.018739
CrossRef
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
Epidemiology of injuries in competition taekwondo: A meta-analysis of observational studies
Lystad, RP; Pollard, H; Graham, PL
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 12(6): 614-621.
10.1016/j.jsams.2008.09.013
CrossRef
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Musculoskeletal Injuries Description of an Under-Recognized Injury Problem Among Military Personnel
Hauret, KG; Jones, BH; Bullock, SH; Canham-Chervak, M; Canada, S
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 38(1): S61-S70.
10.1016/j.amepre.2009.10.021
CrossRef
Journal of Sports Sciences
Risk of injury associated with rugby union played on artificial turf
Fuller, CW; Clarke, L; Molloy, MG
Journal of Sports Sciences, 28(5): 563-570.
10.1080/02640411003629681
CrossRef
American Journal of Sports Medicine
Injury Patterns and Injury Rates in the Circus Arts
Shrier, I; Meeuwisse, WH; Matheson, GO; Wingfield, K; Steele, RJ; Prince, F; Hanley, J; Montanaro, M
American Journal of Sports Medicine, 37(6): 1143-1149.
10.1177/0363546508331138
CrossRef
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
Epidemiological studies of injuries in rugby league: Suggestions for definitions, data collection and reporting methods
King, DA; Gabbett, TJ; Gissane, C; Hodgson, L
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 12(1): 12-19.
10.1016/j.jsams.2007.12.001
CrossRef
Clinics in Sports Medicine
Closed Head Injury
Kerr, HA
Clinics in Sports Medicine, 32(2): 273-+.
10.1016/j.csm.2012.12.008
CrossRef
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Development and validation of a new method for the registration of overuse injuries in sports injury epidemiology: the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Centre (OSTRC) Overuse Injury Questionnaire
Clarsen, B; Myklebust, G; Bahr, R
British Journal of Sports Medicine, 47(8): 495-502.
10.1136/bjsports-2012-091524
CrossRef
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
Injury risk is different in team and individual youth sport
Theisen, D; Frisch, A; Malisoux, L; Urhausen, A; Croisier, JL; Seil, R
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 16(3): 200-204.
10.1016/j.jsams.2012.07.007
CrossRef
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Exposure-adjusted incidence rates and severity of competition injuries in Australian amateur taekwondo athletes: a 2-year prospective study
Lystad, RP; Graham, PL; Poulos, RG
British Journal of Sports Medicine, 47(7): 441-+.
10.1136/bjsports-2012-091666
CrossRef
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine
A Framework for Recording Recurrences, Reinjuries, and Exacerbations in Injury Surveillance
Fuller, CW; Bahr, R; Dick, RW; Meeuwisse, WH
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 17(3): 197-200.
10.1097/JSM.0b013e3180471b89
PDF (83) | CrossRef
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine
The Sport Medicine Diagnostic Coding System
Meeuwisse, WH; Wiley, JP
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 17(3): 205-207.
10.1097/JSM.0b013e318057518f
PDF (52) | CrossRef
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine
Consensus Statement on Epidemiological Studies of Medical Conditions in Tennis, April 2009
Pluim, BM; Fuller, CW; Batt, ME; Chase, L; Hainline, B; Miller, S; Montalvan, B; Renström, P; Stroia, KA; Weber, K; Wood, TO
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 19(6): 445-450.
10.1097/JSM.0b013e3181be35e5
PDF (98) | CrossRef
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine
Epidemiological Study of Injuries in International Rugby Sevens
Fuller, CW; Taylor, A; Molloy, MG
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 20(3): 179-184.
10.1097/JSM.0b013e3181df1eea
PDF (98) | CrossRef
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine
The Epidemiology of Head Injuries in English Professional Rugby Union
Kemp, SP; Hudson, Z; Brooks, JH; Fuller, CW
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 18(3): 227-234.
10.1097/JSM.0b013e31816a1c9a
PDF (90) | CrossRef
Back to Top | Article Outline

© 2007 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

You Tube The CJSM Blog Linked In Facebook Twitter

Login

Article Tools

Images

Share