Strategies used by professional rugby union clubs to manage players for artificial turf exposure
McKay CD, Cross MJ, Kemp SPT, Stokes KA
South African journal of sports medicine · 2 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Cross-sectional study (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- No health outcome
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Possibly industry funded
- Authors
- At least one author declares a financial tie to industry
Based on full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2020-10-08 · S Afr J Sports Med · vol. 32 · issue 1 · pp. 1–7
- Publisher
- South African Sports Medicine Association
- Cited
- 4 citations · more than 55% of similar papers · 0.4× the field average
- References
- 15 works
- Access
- Open access (free to publish) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Sports injuries and prevention · Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques · Cardiovascular Effects of Exercise
- Keywords
- Bespoke, Club, Medicine, Football, Psychology, Physical therapy, Advertising, Business, Political science
4 authors
From GB
- Carly D. McKayUniversity of Bath
- Matt R. CrossUniversity of Bath
- Simon P T KempUniversity of London; The Football Association; London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
- Keith StokesThe Football Association; University of Bath
Abstract
Background
The use of artificial turf on rugby pitches is increasingly commonplace but there is limited evidence around its effects on injury, recovery, and performance. It is unclear whether this uncertainty influences player management strategies in professional clubs.
Objectives
To understand how professional rugby union clubs in England approach player management for artificial turf, to explore how the beliefs of medical and strength/conditioning staff influence these decisions, and to determine whether differences exist between clubs with different levels of exposure to artificial surfaces.
Methods
The study was a cross-sectional mixed methods study. Twenty-three medical and strength/conditioning staff members from 12 English Premiership Rugby Union clubs completed two bespoke questionnaires and participated in a semi-structured interview.
Results
Two-thirds of the participants described formal club-level approaches to artificial turf. All participants from low-exposure clubs (<50% training and match time on artificial pitches) reported adjusting player recovery strategies following games on artificial turf to mitigate elevated muscle soreness and fatigue. Clubs with artificial surfaces at their home venues were less likely to adapt recovery than clubs with natural turf pitches. Regardless of exposure participants believed switching between surface types was a risk factor for injury. Medics reported that acute injuries associated with artificial turf exposure typically occurred at the foot or ankle, whereas abrasions and overuse injuries were more common and often affected the knees, hips and lower back. Players with compromised joints were less likely to be selected for matches on artificial surfaces.
Conclusion
Player management around artificial turf is a focus for staff at professional rugby union clubs. Club practices vary by exposure and may consequently influence injury risk estimates.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.