According to the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Sports Medicine Concussion Program, “Between 1.7 and 3 million sports-and recreation-related concussions happen each year. Around 300,000 are football-related.”
Less Concussion Risk With Rugby-Style Tackling?
1 min read Premium comments
Secondary#concussion#footballstyletackling#rugbystyletackling
Tackling in high impact sports continues to be a concerning risk factor for concussion; however, a new study suggests that rugby-style tackling has a lower force of impact than football-style tackling, leading to the question of whether or not football teams should adopt the rugby-style tackling to reduce their players’ risk for concussion. The study was presented at the American Academy of Neurology Sports Concussion Conference in Indianapolis.
“For athletes who participate in a sport that involves a tackle or direct contact, adapting a rugby-style tackle where the players lead with their shoulders, not their heads, could make college sports safer,” said Zach Garrett, DHS, of Marshall University in Huntington, West Virginia.
“A small number of NFL teams have incorporated the rugby-style tackle in an effort to reduce risk of concussion.”
Garrett and colleagues followed 30 male university athletes during a spring practice season, measuring impact data. Data was collected from sensors placed in the helmets of football players and in the mouthguards of rugby players.
According to the data collected, the football players experienced 3,921 impacts compared with the rugby players who only experienced 1,868 impacts. In addition, the frequency and amount of force of impacts were lower for the rugby players.
Rugby players had impacts with an average of 21 g-force compared with the football players’ average of 63 g-force.
“Further studies with larger numbers of participants are needed to confirm these results and also to determine whether using a rugby-style tackle could effectively reduce the force of impact and potentially reduce the number or severity of concussions in college football,” Garrett said.
React:
Discussion
This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?
Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.
We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.
Join the conversation
Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.