Why the study?
To determine whether a team illness prevention strategy would reduce the incidence of acute illness during the Super Rugby tournament.
Does a team illness prevention strategy reduce the incidence of acute illness in professional rugby players?
Does a team illness prevention strategy reduce the incidence of acute illness in professional rugby players?
Implementation of a team illness prevention strategy was associated with a 59% reduction in acute illnesses among professional rugby players.
Supports illness prevention protocols in elite rugby; leaves open efficacy in other sports or randomized settings.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a team illness prevention strategy (TIPS) would reduce the incidence of acute illness during the Super Rugby tournament. METHODS: We studied 1340 male professional rugby union player seasons from six South African teams that participated in the Super Rugby tournament (2010-2016). Medical staff recorded all illnesses daily (126 850 player days) in a 3-year control (C: 2010-2012; 47 553 player days) and a 4-year intervention (I: 2013-2016; 79 297 player days) period. A five-element TIPS was implemented in the I period, following agreement by consensus. Incidence rate (IR: per 1000 player days; 95% CI) of all acute illnesses, illness by main organ system, infectious illness and illness burden (days lost due to illness per 1000 player days) were compared between C and I period. RESULTS: The IR of acute illness was significantly lower in the I (5.5: 4.7 to 6.4) versus the C period (13.2: 9.7 to 18.0) (p<0.001). The IR of respiratory (C=8.6: 6.3 to 11.7; I=3.8: 3.3 to 4.3) (p<0.0001), digestive (C=2.5: 1.8 to 3.6; I=1.1: 0.8 to 1.4) (p<0.001), skin and subcutaneous tissue illness (C=0.7: 0.4 to 1.4; I=0.3: 0.2 to 0.5) (p=0.0238), all infections (C=8.4: 5.9 to 11.9; I=4.3: 3.7 to 4.9) (p<0.001) and illness burden (C=9.2: 6.8 to 12.5; I=5.7: 4.1 to 7.8) (p=0.0314) were significantly lower in the I versus the C period. CONCLUSION: A TIPS during the Super Rugby tournament was associated with a lower incidence of all acute illnesses (59%), infectious illness (49%) and illness burden (39%). Our findings may have important clinical implications for other travelling team sport settings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schwellnus et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: