Synthetic playing surfaces increase the incidence of match injuries in an elite Rugby Union team

Abstract

ObjectivesTo examine differences in match injury incidence between three playing surfaces in elite Rugby Union. DesignProspective cohort. MethodsMatch injury incidence was assessed in 89 elite Rugby Union players over two-seasons of professional competition (44 matches, 1014 h player exposure). Match injury incidence was assessed on three different playing surfaces; natural grass, hybrid (natural grass combined with approximately 3% synthetic fibres) and fully synthetic (sand and rubber infill). Overall injury incidence, contact and non-contact injury incidence, and the incidence of minor (≤7 d lost) and major (≥8 d lost) injuries were considered using mixed effect models. ResultsOverall match injury incidence doubled on hybrid and synthetic surfaces compared to natural grass (hybrid: OR = 2.58 [95% CI 1.65–4.03], p < 0.001; synthetic: OR = 2.16 [95% CI 1.07–4.37], p = 0.033). Furthermore, the odds of sustaining a contact injury on a pitch containing any synthetic content also increased compared to natural grass (hybrid: OR = 2.31 [95% CI 1.41–3.78], p = 0.001; synthetic: OR = 2.19 [95% CI 1.00–4.77], p = 0.049). The hybrid surface elicited a four times greater likelihood of non-contact injury incidence compared to natural grass (OR = 4.18 [95% CI 1.16–15.04], p = 0.028). However, the playing surface did not affect the severity of match injuries (all p > 0.05). ConclusionsThe present study suggests that even a small percentage (3%) of synthetic content in the playing surface significantly increases match injury incidence, with an effect seen on both contact and non-contact injury incidence. These findings are important to enable practitioners to be aware of the injury implications of playing matches on hybrid and synthetic pitches.