Skip to main content
Download PDF

High school rugby coaches’ knowledge and opinions of concussion in KwaZulu Natal province in South Africa: an ecological cross-sectional study

BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation volume 16, Article number: 139 (2024) Cite this article

This article has been updated

Abstract

Background

Concussions in Rugby Union are common with an increased risk to adolescent players. Coaches are key to injury prevention and a greater understanding of their knowledge and sentiments may guide future initiatives. There is a lack of data on rugby coaches, especially in South Africa. This study aimed to investigate the knowledge and opinions of high school rugby coaches regarding concussion management.

Methods

This cross-sectional study of 37 high school rugby coaches in South Africa, was conducted via a self-reported questionnaire. Concussion knowledge was scored for correct answers only with closed-question scaling methods to measure the importance of items of concussion management using a graphical rating scale. An attitude scale (Likert) was used to assess self-reported opinions and behaviours. Associations were calculated for participant characteristics and overall concussion injury knowledge.

Results

More participants showed good overall knowledge of ≥ 75% (n = 22, 59% vs. n = 15, 40%), especially those with greater coaching experience (p = 0.021). Player welfare was perceived more important than player performance (185 vs. 164), with concussion prevention most important (184 of 185). Appealing characteristics of an injury prevention programme were the improvement of player skill (173, SD ± 0.75, mean 4.68), being adaptable (171, ± 0.86, 4.62), and being completed in the warm-up (167, ± 0.93, 4.51). The biggest perceived barriers were duration (138, ± 1.59, mean 3.73), effort (130, ± 1.56, 3.51), compliance and lack of knowledge (both 127, ± 1.68, 3.43).

Conclusion

These results support the implementation of ongoing concussion education for rugby coaches and identify areas for promoting awareness and knowledge of concussion injury prevention, identification, and specific management of younger athletes. Appealing characteristics and barriers are highlighted and may allow for improved implementation and adherence to concussion prevention programmes.

Key points

• The risk of concussion to female athletes and younger athletes was under-reported and should be addressed in future coach-focused education initiatives.

• Successive educational approaches may be effective in coaches’ knowledge retention, although the most appropriate delivery methods should be researched further.

• The ideal injury prevention programme should improve player skill whilst reducing the risk of injury, be adaptable, completed during the warm-up and not take much time or effort to complete.

Peer Review reports

Background

Concussion in Rugby Union (“rugby”) is common, with potential shorter and longer-lasting symptoms, especially in adolescents [1,2,3]. The longer-lasting symptoms of concussion are associated with deficits in health-related quality of life affecting aspects of social, emotional and psychological well-being [4,5,6,7]. The global population-based rate is above 600 per 100,000 people and is recognized by the WHO as an important public health problem [8]. There is a three- to four-fold higher risk of sustaining a consecutive concussion when having a history of a previous concussion [9]. The Amsterdam International Consensus Statement on Concussion in Sport (6th CIS) describes a sport-related concussion as a traumatic brain injury caused by a direct blow to the head, neck, or body resulting in an impulsive force being transmitted to the brain that occurs in sports and exercise-related activities which may include signs and symptoms presenting immediately or evolving over minutes or hours [10].

In Canada, there are approximately 12 concussions for every 1000 people costing $1.5 billion, with many more indirect costs [11,12,13,14,15]. In South Africa, public health reporting systems are not as developed as in other countries, such as Canada [16]. However, injury reporting of injury burden and injury epidemiology at South African elite youth rugby tournaments have been comprehensively investigated with multiple factors that may contribute to concussion risk factors having been identified [1, 17,18,19,20,21,22,23]. The high standard of concussion management at these elite youth events is comparable to that of international adult matches [24], with attending sports medicine doctors and physiotherapists being qualified in pitch-side concussion management and return-to-play guidelines [25]. However, these elite events do not reflect the concussion management resources routinely available to the majority of the rugby-playing school community in a developing country with limited delivery of services in health and education [26]. In low socioeconomic environments, as seen in many parts of South Africa, multiple barriers exist for students to participate in sports [27, 28], and this will extend to coaches, who are most often teachers first, and sports coaches second. Organized school sports participation has reduced since 2014 [28], and due to resource limitations, unlike at the elite rugby tournaments, qualified healthcare professionals will not be on hand for most of the school sport-playing population, and injury reporting would be a distant consideration.

However, SA Rugby provides the freely accessible BokSmart injury prevention programme which includes, amongst other features, mandatory biennial training workshops for rugby coaches and referees [29]. In South Africa, New Zealand (NZ) and England, rugby coaches are identified as the preferred source of player education on safe techniques and are acknowledged as being influential for player behaviour [30,31,32]. A recent report from NZ showed rugby coaches scored significantly higher than players for knowledge and attitudes of concussion with coach (but not player) education, in a similar approach to BokSmart, called RugbySmart [33]. In South Africa, this coach-orientated education has been associated with positive behavioural change facilitating injury prevention in rugby players [30], although the depth of understanding of concussion knowledge attainment and retention requires further and repeated evaluation.

In other sports, the implementation of exercise-based injury prevention programmes, before or during training sessions, has been successful in reducing the number of injuries [34, 35]. Similarly, the composition of rugby training sessions has an effect on the incidence of a broad spectrum of injuries, including concussion, in both adolescent and adult populations [36, 37], with neuromuscular training (NMT) being acknowledged and recommended for concussion prevention by all expert panelists of the Concussion in Sport Group (CISG) following the findings of a systematic review on prevention of concussion [5, 24].

In most sports at school level in South Africa, coaches are responsible for the planning of training sessions, the composition of which will be influenced by the knowledge, experience, resources and opinions of these coaches [38]. Previously, in coach education initiatives like RugbySmart in NZ and HeadCase in England, coaches were found to have the lowest concussion knowledge compared to players, medical staff and referees [39,40,41,42]. A limited knowledge of the management of concussion injuries has also been described amongst cohorts of South African rugby coaches [43]. Coaches have been shown to instruct with similar methods to how they were coached as a player [44], and in some instances, coaches were willing to put pressure on concussed players to continue playing and/or on the medical team to allow a player with a concussion to continue [42]. The preferences and values of the targeted populations, like patients in medical care and in this research, coaches in coach-education, is an integral component of evidence-based practice [45, 46], and is well-placed in Stage 5 of the TRIPP framework of injury prevention to understand the context of personal, environmental, societal and sports delivery factors that may enhance or be barriers to implementation [47, 48].

A deeper understanding of the factors that guide the decisions and actions of this important stakeholder group is critical to the success of appropriate concussion management in rugby. The purpose of this study was to gain insight into the:

  1. (i)

    knowledge of South African rugby coaches regarding concussion prevention,

  2. (ii)

    opinions of South African rugby coaches on concussion prevention, and

  3. (iii)

    barriers, concerns, or strategies to implementing a rugby injury prevention programme in South African high schools.

Methodology

Study design and setting

This cross-sectional design study was conducted in registered rugby-playing schools in the KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) province in the eastern coastal region of South Africa, an area with a long tradition of schoolboy rugby. Different funding models in these schools result in a wide disparity in resource allocation and availability, with some schools having world-class facilities and other schools not having grass on their sports fields [49]. The historical context of the South African political landscape may be the reason for many of the differences in resources at these schools which ultimately results in social inequality with some people being disadvantaged, relative to others [50].

Participants

Total population sampling was used due to the small number of participants and is considered to be most appropriate as generalisations can be justified for this specific cohort [51]. Other forms of random or stratified sampling were not possible as the researcher did not have access to a full database of the members of the population, rather to one person who disseminated the questionnaire and study information. All registered coaches of the KZN Rugby Union High School database were invited to participate in this study (n = 126).

Research instrument

The research instrument included a self-reported online questionnaire (Appendix A). The first draft questions were developed by the principal researcher who identified relevant topics after a review of the available literature.

The authors used previously reported guidelines and examples of closed-question scaling methods, Rating and Attitude scales, to generate a sequence of values, upon which the measured values were placed [52]. A 10–point numerical rating scale was used to rate the importance of some answers, with one being the lowest value and 10 being the highest value for example; ‘Please rate the following questions on a scale of 1–10 where 1 is the lowest value and 10 is the highest value: 2.1 How important is it to you, to prevent injury to your players?’.

To measure an individual participant’s predisposition to an item, an attitude scale is recommended [52]. Although not validated in this study, a five-point Likert scale, previously reported in research on coach perception and education [53], was used to quantify opinions with numerical values increasing with escalating support for an opinion. This method was deemed more appropriate for some questions and is more suitable for assessing participants’ experiences [54]. For these questions, scores for opinion were added and the total scores were ranked as an indication of the importance of each item. The lowest total score representing “not at all” would be 37 (n = 37 × 1) and the maximum score representing “very” would be 185 (n = 37 × 5).

Face and content validity were established after appraisal of the questionnaire by two high school coaches, a second physiotherapist, and a sports medicine physician. Recommendations, corrections, and re-ordering of answers were implemented to reduce ambiguity and repetition and to improve the overall flow of the answering process. The second draft of the questionnaire included 37 questions. This paper-based format was converted to an electronic format using Google Forms. This was deemed necessary to improve delivery as well as to reduce unnecessary contact and risk for participants during the global pandemic. The electronic form was used in a pilot study with high school coaches (n = 14) to identify any further weaknesses or ambiguities in the research instrument. No further recommendations were received, and the final format received only cosmetic enhancements before being used in the main study.

Procedures

The University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN) Biomedical Ethics Committee approved the study (BREC 00000961/2020). Further, permission and support were obtained from provincial bodies and the Chairman of the KZN High School Rugby Association. A descriptive email with a study link was sent electronically to all registered email addresses on the High School coach database. All relevant study information was provided, and coaches were invited to participate in the study. The study link allowed access to the online questionnaire and could be completed on any web-enabled electronic device, including smartphones. Two weeks after the initial email, a follow-up email was sent to all registered email addresses to remind and encourage participation in the study. No additional questionnaires were received one month after the initial call for participants, and the data collection phase was concluded (4 weeks).

Data analysis

Data was entered into Microsoft Excel and analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS), version 28. Descriptive and inferential statistics was calculated, including the percentage and 95% confidence interval positive response to questions. Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used to test normality of the data. Fisher's exact test was used to test the association between Coaches’ overall knowledge versus demographic variables. One-sample t-test was used to compare the mean Coaches’ opinions on prevention of injury and player performance and hypothesized value (i.e. 3). Furthermore, multi-covariate logistic regression was used to check the effects of demographic characteristic on Coaches’ overall knowledge. All the tests were two-sided and all p-values reported was tested at α = 0.05 level.

Participants’ scores for knowledge of concussion and injury prevention were calculated with a threshold of 75% and separated into two categories: ‘good overall knowledge’ (≥ 75%) and ‘not good overall knowledge’ (< 75%). These results were tabled according to participant background characteristics (Table 1). Participant answers that included ‘Maybe’ were considered to be incorrect for the purposes of calculation.

Table 1 Participant characteristics and associations between overall knowledge versus background variables
Full size table

Results

Participant characteristics

Of the 126 registered rugby coaches contacted on the database, 37 completed the questionnaire resulting in a response rate of 29%. All participants were adult males with an average age of 35.6 years (range 23–60 years), and an average coaching experience of 11.3 years (range 1–30 years; total 418 years). Almost all participants, had a coaching qualification, with most (n = 34, 92%) having an advanced coaching qualification namely (World Rugby Levels 1–3), or having a World Rugby Coach Educator License. Almost all participants had completed a BokSmart qualification within the preceding three years; while half of the participants had a first aid certification. All participants had witnessed a concussion, and most had personally sustained a previous concussion injury. All, except one participant, had played rugby at the school level (Table 1).

The Cohen’s effect sizes and odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals for the background variables of participants are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Coach background variables and knowledge categories displayed with confidence interval and effect sizes
Full size table

Knowledge

The majority of participants showed good overall knowledge (n = 22, 59% vs. n = 15, 40%) with participants under 40-years-old, and the only participant over 60 years, showing more ‘good overall knowledge’ than those aged 40–59 years (Tables 1 and 2). Similarly, those with greater coaching experience, a first aid certificate, a recent BokSmart injury prevention programme qualification, or who played rugby at school displayed higher levels of knowledge than participants with less coaching experience, those without a first aid or BokSmart injury prevention programme qualification, or who didn’t play rugby at the high school level. However, only the relationship between good knowledge and rugby coaching experience was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05). Participants achieved higher overall ‘good knowledge’ scores irrespective of having advanced coaching qualifications, however with a large range in the effect size from small to large (-0.21 -3.22), and were more likely to display good overall knowledge if they had not experienced a concussion personally, than if they had.

With regards to specific knowledge regarding concussion in rugby, all but one participant correctly identified a concussion incident as an impairment of brain function after impulsive forces transmitted to the head (n = 36; 97%), and all participants identified the appropriate management of a player who had sustained a concussion injury as “removal from the field of play” (n = 37; 100%) [55]. Most participants identified that a loss of consciousness was not required when diagnosing a concussion injury and correctly identified some items that may reduce the risk of injury to their players (Table 3). However, half of the participants incorrectly identified “head protection” as an item to reduce the risk of concussion injuries. Some participants correctly identified some risk factors for sustaining a concussion injury, and most participants did not acknowledge that female athletes were at an increased risk of a concussion injury (Table 3). Participants most commonly identified that all paying positions had an ‘equal risk’ of sustaining a concussion injury, followed by those who thought that the loose forwards (n = 7;19%); inside backs (n = 5;14%); tight five, and front row (n = 3; 8%); and lastly outside backs (n = 1; 3%) were at greater risk.

Table 3 Participants’ responses regarding specific rugby concussion injury knowledge
Full size table

Symptoms

With respect to symptoms suggestive of a concussion-type injury, all participants responded positively for dizziness, nausea/vomiting, and confusion, and almost all identified blurred vision and emotional changes as symptoms suggestive of a concussion (Table 3). To a lesser extent, the involuntary straightening of arms and/or legs following contact to the head was chosen as a positive symptom of a concussion injury (n = 31, 84%). Almost half (43%) of the participants incorrectly identified shivering as a symptom of a potential concussion, and a small number of participants incorrectly identified choking and coughing (n = 2, 5%) (Table 3). Most participants identified potential long-term effects of concussion as headaches (n = 37, 100), memory loss (n = 36, 97%), and depression (n = 30, 80%) in descending order, although they did not identify substance abuse or were unsure of this association. A minority of participants (n = 8, 22%) associated eating disorders with the long-term effects of concussion (Table 3).

Concerning “Return-to-Play” guidelines following a suspected concussion injury, most participants were aware of both the World Rugby guidelines (n = 35, 95%), their school’s guidelines (n = 36, 97%)and of the “referee’s blue card” (n = 34, 92%), indicative of the referee raising concern of a head injury to a rugby player during a match (Table 2) [56, 57].

Opinion

In general, the overall six items that addressed coach opinions towards injury prevention and player performance were found to have a mean value of 4.27 (SD ± 0.34), out of a possible 5 maximum points. Player welfare was considered to be more important than player performance (185 vs. 164 respectively) with the item “very important” for player welfare achieving the highest possible score (Table 4). Similarly, the importance of concussion prevention scored very highly (184 out of a possible 185). Most participants felt that recent law changes had improved player safety in rugby, and most participants were satisfied that enough was currently being done to prevent concussion in rugby, although opinions toward rugby becoming ‘too regulated’ were more divided resulting in the greatest standard deviation (Table 4).

Table 4 Coaches’ opinions on prevention of injury and player performance
Full size table

Participants identified the doctor as having the greatest responsibility to identify a player who has a concussive injury (184), followed by first aiders (180), the referee (174), the coach (169) and the physiotherapist (168) (Table 4). Other players (139), and parents were considered less responsible (127), and the injured player was considered the least responsible to identify a concussion injury (113), although had the greatest standard deviation of all role players. Similarly, participants also identified the doctor as having the most responsibility to manage a player with a concussive injury (177), followed by the coach (171) and the first aider (163) (Table 4). Other players were considered the least responsible for managing another player’s concussion injury (95), however, opinions differed the most on this item with the greatest standard deviation (SD 1.68).

The provincial sports organisation was considered to have the greatest responsibility for the prevention of concussion injuries (178), followed by the schools’ Director of Sport (177) (Table 4). SA Rugby and coaches followed and were considered to equally share the same level of responsibility (175), before medical personnel (first aider, doctor, physiotherapist), players, Heads of schools, and parents. The Department of Education was considered the least responsible for the prevention of concussion injuries in school children participating in rugby (122) (Table 5).

Table 5 Coaches’ opinions towards the responsibility of identification, management and prevention of concussion injuries
Full size table

Barriers

The biggest barrier reported by participants to implementing an injury prevention programme was time (total score 138, SD ± 1.59, mean 3.73) followed closely by effort (130, ± 1.56, 3.51), compliance (127, ± 1.68, 3.43), knowledge (127, ± 1.68, 3.43), planning (126, ± 1.69, 3.41), attitude (124, ± 1.69, 3.35), equipment (117, ± 1.73, 3.30) and intervention complexity (116, ± 1.46, 3.14) (Fig. 1). The lowest reported barriers to implementation were facilities (total score 109, SD ± 1.82, 2.95), culture (105, ± 1.61, 2.84), space (86, ± 1.56, 2.32), and language (76, ± 1.49, 2.05) (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

South African coaches’ opinions: attractive characteristics and barriers towards implementing an injury prevention programme (permission obtained)

Full size image

Attractive characteristics

The most attractive characteristic of an injury prevention programme was to improve player skill (total score 173, SD ± 0.75, mean 4.68), followed by being adaptable (171, ± 0.86, 4.62), and being completed in the warm-up at the start of a training session (167, ± 0.93, 4.51). Interestingly, injury prevention programmes that were not included in the warm-up were the least attractive (total score 63, SD ± 1.24, mean 1.70), with more than two-thirds of participants reporting ‘not at all’ attractive (n = 26) (Fig. 1).

Less appealing characteristics, in descending order, were being simple (160, ± 4.32, 0.94), being evidence-based (158, ± 1.26, 4.27), requiring extra equipment (157, ± 1.28, 4.24), being detailed (149, ± 1.44, 4.03) being player led (134, ± 1.36, 3.62) and requiring facilities (113, ± 1.47, 3.05). A session considered to be quick, of less than 15 min in duration, was only slightly more attractive than a longer session of 15–30 min (123, ± 1.49, 3.32 vs 117, ± 1.61, 3.16) (Fig. 1).

More than half of the participants reported doing some form of baseline testing (Sports Concussion Assessment Tool 5, n = 5, 14%; clinical testing, n = 11, 30%; HeadSmart, n = 1, 3%; none, n = 20, 54%) prior to their players sustaining a concussion, and most participants used the Concussion Recognition Tool (n = 25, 68%) following a head impact to their players. Participants identified the frequency of coach-player discussions regarding concussion injuries was similar to that between coaches and other coaches (126, 68% vs. 120, 65% respectively).

Discussion

Knowledge

The main finding of this study was the identification of the knowledge and opinions regarding concussion injuries of a cohort of High School Rugby coaches in one province of South Africa. Previous concerns about the dissemination of concussion information and guidelines to amateur and community players in Australia are similar in this study [58, 59]. In this study, although all coaches had completed the BokSmart training prior to testing, only half had a good overall general knowledge of concussion injuries, with greater rugby coaching experience being the only significant differentiating factor. This finding does however support repeated coach training and re-accreditation where knowledge may be retained through greater exposure, a technique seen in other adult education approaches in the US [60]. Notably, this is the chosen method of the biennial SA Rugby BokSmart Rugby Safety accreditation programme for coaches and referees, supplemented with online resources since 2009 [61, 62]. Further, the BokSmart Programme aims to reduce the burden of all injuries, especially catastrophic injuries, with a specific emphasis placed on education on concussion [61].

With regard to specific concussion knowledge, correct tackle technique was identified as being associated with reducing the risk of head injury and is recommended by World Rugby to be an appropriate technical element that high school rugby coaches should be addressing during training sessions and matches [63]. Another element that was appropriately recognized and pertinent to this cohort, was that of physical and cardiorespiratory fitness preparation of players. Research from the US, Australia, Canada, Ireland and the UK has demonstrated that lower fitness levels have been associated with an increased risk of injury in sub-elite athletes, and lower neck strength with in an increase in concussion incidence [64,65,66,67].

Interestingly, half of the participants identified rugby headgear as an item to reduce the risk of concussion, similar to previous research findings [42]. However, headgear may have no effect [68, 69], or may result in a change in behaviour of athletes when wearing headgear, referred to as the risk-compensation phenomenon, thus increasing the chances of concussion, especially in contact sports [38, 69, 70]. This misconception should be addressed as coaches are an important source of information for players and parents, especially at school levels.

Another item that divided the cohort almost equally, was that of shivering as a symptom of concussion. This sign to raise the body’s temperature should be distinguished from the myoclonic or tonic–clonic motor jerks occasionally occurring immediately after a head trauma/injury [71]. Although this symptom is reported as uncommon in the literature [71], it is addressed in the BokSmart Concussion Guidance and World Rugby’s Player Welfare resources [72, 73], and listed on the Concussion Recognition Tool (CRT6) designed for non-medically trained individuals (coaches) [74], and on the Sports Concussion Assessment Tools (SCAT6, or Child SCAT6), designed for medical personnel [75, 76].

It may be debated as to whether all concussion information is pertinent to coaches, especially with regard to the possible long-term symptoms or effects, as their role may be considered more important in the prevention and identification of concussion injuries. However, the authors would argue that an understanding of both the acute and chronic signs and symptoms of a concussive injury is critical and may not be easily identifiable. Freely available and regularly updated tools, like the Concussion Recognition Tool 6 (CRT6), are designed to provide guidance in improving the health and well-being of athletes, and should be routinely used [77].

Whilst some of the results of specific concussion knowledge differed between coaches, critical components of BokSmart and WR concussion initiatives were consistently observed in the ‘Recognise and Remove’ and ‘Return-to-play’ guidelines for a player with a suspected concussion injury [72, 78]. This generally widespread understanding is supported by the opinion scores of concussion prevention being very important to high school rugby coaches. However, although coaches appeared to have the appropriate knowledge, a small number still reported that they would let a player return to play on the same day of sustaining a concussion injury, supporting recent findings in community club rugby stakeholders which are contrary to player welfare guidelines [38, 42]. Further, one-third of coaches did not advocate for players returning to rugby after a graduated return to play (GRTP) or after a doctor had cleared the player, which opposes both World Rugby and BokSmart protocols [72, 79].

With regard to specific concussion knowledge, the risk to female athletes and younger athletes was underreported by this cohort [80,81,82]. Although not a consistent finding in adult Women’s rugby [83, 84], and the limited research in female adolescent rugby players [82], a significantly greater risk of concussion injuries, and longer recovery times, has been identified in female high school athletes in other contact sports like baseball, basketball and soccer [80, 85]. With the rapid growth in Women’s rugby globally, with almost a third more players now registered than in 2017, and women accounting for more than 25% of the overall playing population, further research in this area is recommended [80, 86].

Additionally, this study identified the opinions of high school rugby coaches towards injury and concussion prevention. It is encouraging that player welfare is considered the highest priority, and concussion prevention rated higher than player performance, especially in a competitive high school rugby playing community that includes professional coaches, sports scientists, and high-performance programmes and centres [87, 88]. Fittingly, improving player skill was the most appealing feature of an injury prevention programme, reinforcing this as a priority area for coaches. Coaches valued time and efficiency as highly attractive features of an injury prevention programme that is completed in the warm-up, coinciding with the most significant reported barriers to implementing an injury prevention programme being the required time and effort.

With respect to opinions regarding responsibility, coaches considered doctors to have the highest responsibility for both identifying and managing concussion injuries in players. While first aiders are required to be at all normal school rugby matches, but not at training sessions [89], most community-based teams did not employ qualified medical support staff [90], Doctors were the least likely members to be at community rugby matches and most likely to be absent at high school rugby training sessions, where a more controlled playing environment has previously been described, with a lower risk of a concussion injury [89, 91]. The coaches in this study regarded the first aider as having the most responsibility for the prevention of concussions, which is encouraging as many injury prevention initiatives provide and mandates rugby-specific first aid training for example; The BokSmart Rugby Medic programme, England Rugby Emergency First aid in Rugby Union (EFARU) and WR First aid in Rugby (FAIR) courses [92,93,94].

The provincial sport’s governing body (KZNRU) was considered to have the most responsibility for preventing concussions, followed by the school sports administration, which is similar to previous international findings [95]. While coaches acknowledged a certain degree of responsibility toward identifying, managing, and preventing concussion injuries, they conveyed much less responsibility for the players in this regard. As key stakeholders for the BokSmart programme, this is an avenue that should be explored in greater detail in further studies. In contrast to other countries where concussion is seen as a Public Health issue [96,97,98], the Government Department of Education was reported to be the least responsible for preventing concussions in school sports.

The results of this study provide valuable information and insights into coaches' knowledge, opinions a behaviours with real-world relevance. The insights may impact future policy and practice for the design of future concussion education but also for the development of concussion prevention programmes which are dependent on coach adherence.

Future research should include longitudinal studies to evaluate changes in knowledge and attitudes over time, and gaps or trends in the content of concussion education initiatives. Alternate methods of adult learning may also be incorporated as these may be considered more appropriate to knowledge retention than taught sessions, and warrant further exploration, especially with the rapid advancements in digital education and simulation-based education. Future educational and knowledge transfer strategies could be tailored to individual needs based on a pre-course assessment, thus ensuring the most appropriate use of time and resources to ensure the appropriate knowledge transfer to each individual.

Limitations

Purposive samples are prone to researcher bias [51], however, the participants included were anonymous to the researcher which reduces this bias. The answers were self-reported and open to bias and socially acceptable answers, especially with the considerable amount of attention surrounding concussions in the mainstream media. The implications for bias due to phrasing should be considered in the development of future research tools [99]. The response rate for the questionnaire was low but acceptable (29%), even after follow-up invitations to participate in the study, and are open to manipulation [99]. The response rate was considered ‘acceptable’ when compared to a previous study using a questionnaire research tool via email in coaches (18%) [100]. Increased participation could have provided more information on the current research aims and reduced the homogeneity of the sample, as all participants were adult males. Thus, the opinions, knowledge and behaviour of the vast majority of KZN High School rugby coaches could not be included in this analysis, and are not representative, especially coaches of different genders. Non-response bias highlights that the opinions, knowledge and behaviour of non-respondents may differ significantly on different factors from those who did complete the questionnaire [99].

Payment for participation was not an option due to the limited resources of this study, however, this was considered. Extending the reach to participants may have increased participation and future designs should include the use of social media and social media ‘influencers’ to recruit a greater number of participants.

Although a pilot study was conducted, the research tool was not assessed for reliability. The Likert scale may have reduced the effect of central tendency bias [101]. The official communication from the High School Rugby Association is in the English language, however the researchers acknowledge the questionnaire was only provided in English in South Africa, a country with 11 official languages. Coaches with limited internet access may have been excluded unknowingly from this study, as the questionnaires were distributed online. Similarly, there may be high school coaches in KZN who are not registered with the KZNRU. Lastly, the study was conducted during the COVID-19 global shutdown of all sports, although this was unlikely to influence knowledge or opinions.

Conclusion

Our results assist in a greater understanding of the knowledge and opinions of key stakeholders in Rugby Union, namely high school rugby coaches, regarding concussion prevention, responsibility for the identification, management, and prevention of concussion, and barriers and preferences to implementing a concussion prevention programme. An injury prevention programme that would improve player skill whilst reducing the risk of injury, is adaptable and not take much time or effort to complete, is the preference of the coaches in this study. These findings support the coach-focused education strategy of the biennial accreditation required by SA Rugby’s BokSmart programme while also identifying knowledge gaps and providing insight into specific improvements in concussion education initiatives in rugby.

Availability of data and materials

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Change history

  • 30 June 2024

    There was a typographical error in the article title in the original publication. The article has been updated to correct Kwa-Zulu to KwaZulu.

Abbreviations

CISG:

Concussion in Sport Group

CRT:

Concussion Recognition Tool

IBM:

International Business Machines

GRTP:

Graduated Return to Play

KZN:

KwaZulu-Natal

NMT :

Neuromuscular training

SCAT:

Sports Concussion Assessment Tool

SD:

Standard deviation

UKZN:

University of KwaZulu Natal

WR:

World Rugby

References

  1. McFie S, Brown JC, Hendricks S, Posthumus M, Readhead C, Lambert M, et al. Incidence and factors associated with concussion injuries at the 2011 to 2014 South African Rugby Union Youth Week Tournaments. Clin J Sport Med. 2016;26:398–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. King D, Hume PA, Hardaker N, Cummins C, Gissane C, Clark T. Sports-related injuries in New Zealand: National Insurance (Accident Compensation Corporation) claims for five sporting codes from 2012 to 2016. Br J Sports Med. 2019;53(16):1026–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Viviers PL, Viljoen JT, Derman W. A Review of a Decade of Rugby Union Injury Epidemiology: 2007–2017. Sports Health. 2018;10(3):223–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. McGuine TA, Pfaller A, Kliethermes S, Schwarz A, Hetzel S, Hammer E, et al. The effect of sport-related concussion injuries on concussion symptoms and health-related quality of life in male and female adolescent athletes: a prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 2019;47(14):3514–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brown NJ, Mannix RC, O’Brien MJ, Gostine D, Collins MW, Meehan WP. Effect of cognitive activity level on duration of post-concussion symptoms. Pediatrics. 2014;133(2):e299–304.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Manley G, Gardner AJ, Schneider KJ, Guskiewicz KM, Bailes J, Cantu RC, et al. A systematic review of potential long-term effects of sport-related concussion. Br J Sports Med. 2017;51(12):969–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rice SM, Parker AG, Rosenbaum S, Bailey A, Mawren D, Purcell R. Sport-related concussion and mental health outcomes in elite athletes: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2018;48(2):447–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cassidy JD, Carroll LJ, Peloso PM, Borg J, von Holst H, Holm L, et al. Incidence, risk factors and prevention of mild traumatic brain injury: results of the WHO Collaborating Centre Task Force on mild traumatic brain injury. J Rehab Med. 2004;43 Suppl:28–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. van Lerssel J, Osmond M, Hamid J, Sampson M, Zemek R. What is the risk of recurrent concussion in children and adolescents aged 5–18 years? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2021;55(12):663–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Patricios JS, Schneider KJ, Dvorak J, Ahmed OH, Blauwet C, Cantu RC, et al. Consensus statement on concussion in sport: the 6th International Conference on Concussion in Sport-Amsterdam, October 2022. Br J Sports Med. 2023;57(11):695–711.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Maas AIR, Adams H, Menon DK, Adelson PD, Andelic N, Bell MJ, et al. Traumatic brain injury: integrated approaches to improve prevention, clinical care, and research. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16(12):987–1048.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ryu WHA, Feinstein A, Colantonio A, Streiner DL, Dawson DR. Early identification and incidence of mild TBI in Ontario. Can J Neurol Sci. 2009;36(4):429–35.

  13. Paul C, Evan F, Tharshini C, Laura L, Catherine WH, George M, et al. The Toronto Concussion Study: a prospective investigation of characteristics in a cohort of adults from the general population seeking care following acute concussion, 2016–2020. Front Neurol. 2023; 14. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2023.1152504.

  14. Cindy H, Michael DC, Chantal V, Alicja M, Brian K, Andrew B, et al. Identification of hidden health utilization services and costs in adults awaiting tertiary care following mild traumatic brain injury in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Concussion. 2016;1(4):S3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Langer LK, Bayley MT, Levy C, Munce SEP, Lawrence DW, Tam A, et al. Medical care among individuals with a concussion in Ontario: a population-based study. Can J Neurol Sci. 2024;51(1):87–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Malakoane B, Heunis JC, Chikobvu P, Kigozi NG, Kruger WH. Public health system challenges in the Free State, South Africa: a situation appraisal to inform health system strengthening. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020; 20(1). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4862-y.

  17. Sewry N, Verhagen E, Lambert M, van Mechelen W, Readhead C, Viljoen W, et al. Seasonal time-loss match injury rates and burden in South African under-16 rugby teams. J Sci Med Sport. 2019;22(1):54–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Brown J, Verhagen E, Viljoen W, Readhead C, van Mechelen W, Hendricks S, et al. The incidence and severity of injuries at the 2011 South African Rugby Union (SARU) Youth Week tournaments. S Afr J Sports Med. 2012;24(2):49–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Brown JC, Viljoen W, Lambert MI, Readhead C, Fuller C, Van Mechelen W, et al. The economic burden of time-loss injuries to youth players participating in week-long rugby union tournaments. J Sci Med Sport. 2015;18(4):394–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Burger N, Lambert MI, Viljoen W, Brown JC, Readhead C, den Hollander S, et al. Mechanisms and factors associated with tackle-related injuries in South African Youth Rugby Union players. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(2):278–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Burger N, Lambert MI, Viljoen W, Brown JC, Readhead C, Hendricks S. Tackle-related injury rates and nature of injuries in South African Youth Week tournament rugby union players (under-13 to under-18): an observational cohort study. BMJ Open. 2014;4(8):e005556.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Burger N, Lambert MI, Viljoen W, Brown JC, Readhead C, Hendricks S. Tackle technique and tackle-related injuries in high-level South African Rugby Union under-18 players: real-match video analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2016;50(15):932–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hendricks S, O’Connor S, Lambert M, Brown J, Burger N, Mc Fie S, et al. Contact technique and concussions in the South African under-18 Coca-Cola Craven Week Rugby tournament. Eur J Sport Sci. 2015;15(6):557–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. SA Rugbymag.co.za. Craven Week dealing with Concussion. 2018. [cited 2023 26 July]. Available from: https://www.sarugbymag.co.za/craven-week-dealingwith-concussion/.

  25. World Rugby. Player Welfare/Medical, c2020. Date unknown [cited 2023 26 July]. Available from: https://passport.world.rugby/player-welfare-medical/.

  26. The World Bank. The World Bank in South Africa 2023, c 2023. 2023. [cited 2023 26 July]. Available from: https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/southafrica/overview#1.

  27. Burnett C. From policy to practice for school sport: lessons from South Africa. J Phys Educ Sport. 2020;20(4):1754–61.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Draper CE, Micklesfield LK, Harbron J, Tomaz SA, Monyeki A, Kruger HS, et al. Results from the Healthy Active Kids South Africa 2018 Report Card. S Afr J Child Health. 2019;13(3):130–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Viljoen W, Patricios J. BokSmart – implementing a National Rugby Safety Programme. Br J Sports Med. 2012;46:492–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Brown JC, Gardner-Lubbe S, Lambert MI, van Mechelen W, Verhagen E. Coach-directed education is associated with injury-prevention behaviour in players: an ecological cross-sectional study. Br J Sports Med. 2018;52(15):989–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Gianotti SM, Quarrie KL, Hume PA. Evaluation of RugbySmart: a rugby union community injury prevention programme. J Sci Med Sport. 2009;12(3):371–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Barden C, Stokes KA, McKay CD. Implementation of the Activate injury prevention exercise programme in English schoolboy rugby union. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2021;7(2):e001018.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Salmon DM, Romanchuk J, Sullivan J, Walters S, Clacy A, Register-Mihalik J, et al. Concussion knowledge, attitude and reporting intention in rugby coaches and high school rugby players. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2021;16(1):54–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Emery CA, Roy TO, Whittaker JL, Nettel-Aguirre A, van Mechelen W. Neuromuscular training injury prevention strategies in youth sport: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(13):865–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Barengo NC, Meneses-Echavez JF, Ramirez-Velez R, Cohen DD, Tovar G, Bautista JE. The impact of the FIFA 11+ training program on injury prevention in football players: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014;11(11):11986–2000.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Hislop MD, Stokes KA, Williams S, McKay CD, England ME, Kemp SPT, et al. Reducing musculoskeletal injury and concussion risk in schoolboy rugby players with a pre-activity movement control exercise programme: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Br J Sports Med. 2017;51(15):1140–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Attwood MJ, Roberts SP, Trewartha G, England ME, Stokes KA. Efficacy of a movement control injury prevention programme in adult men’s community rugby union: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Br J Sports Med. 2018;52(6):368–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Archbold HA, Rankin AT, Webb M, Nicholas R, Eames NW, Wilson RK, et al. RISUS study: rugby injury surveillance in ulster schools. Br J Sports Med. 2017;51(7):600–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. New Zealand Rugby. RugbySmart c2023. New Zealand Rugby. Not dated [cited 2023 16 July]. Available from: https://www.rugbysmart.co.nz/injuries/concussion/.

  40. Rugby Football Union. HeadCase. Not dated [cited 2023 26 July]. Available from: https://www.englandrugby.com/participation/playing/headcase.

  41. King D, Hume PA, Clark T. First-aid and concussion knowledge of rugby league team management, administrators and officials in New Zealand. N Zeal J Sports Med. 2010;37(2):56–69.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mathema P, Evans D, Moore I, Ranson C, Martin R, Mathema P, Evans D, Moore IS, Ranson C, Martin R. Concussed or not? An assessment of concussion experience and knowledge within elite and semiprofessional rugby union. Clin J Sport Med. 2016;1(26):320–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kraak W, Vuuren HV, Welman K. Post-concussion return-to-play: Perceptions of roles, responsibilities and guideline implementation among community club rugby stakeholders in South Africa. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2021;16(4):934–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Anderson D, Cathcart J, Kerr D, Moore I, Hislop M, Wilson I. An investigation of coaches’ awareness of injury in elite adolescent rugby union in Northern Irish schools - a qualitative study. Phys Ther Sport. 2022;57:17–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Sackett DL, Straus SE, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evidence-based medicine : how to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Sackett DL. Evidence-based medicine. Semin Perinatol. 1997;21(1):3–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Finch C. A new framework for research leading to sports injury prevention. J Sci Med Sport. 2006;9(1–2):3–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Tee JC, McLaren SJ, Jones B. Sports injury prevention is complex: we need to invest in better processes, not singular solutions. Sports Med. 2020;50(4):689–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Growing Sports Foundation Trust (GSFT). South Africa must look to history to level the playing fields for school kids: Growing Sports Foundation; 2019. Available from: https://growingsports.co.za/2019/07/09/south-africa-must-look-to-history-to-level-the-playing-field-for-school-kids/.

  50. Dodo OE, Ntombana L. Social policy paradigms, education and development through sports. Adm Public. 2022;30(3):43–62.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Gaganpreet S. Pros and cons of different sampling techniques. Int J Appl Res. 2017;3(7):749–52.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Taherdoost H. What Is the Best Response Scale for Survey and Questionnaire Design; Review of Different Lengths of Rating Scale. Int J Acad Res Man. 2022;8(1):1–10.

  53. Nash C, Sproule J. Coaches perceptions of their coach education experiences. Int J Sport Psychol. 2012;43(1):33–52.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Garratt AM, Helgeland J, Gulbrandsen P. Five-point scales outperform 10-point scales in a randomized comparison of item scaling for the patient experiences questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(2):200–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. McCrory P, Meeuwisse W, Dvorak J, Aubry M, Bailes J, Broglio S, et al. Consensus statement on concussion in sport-the 5(th) international conference on concussion in sport held in Berlin, October 2016. Br J Sports Med. 2017;51(11):838–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. SA Rugby. Blue Card. c2023. Not dated [cited 2023 26 July].  Available from: https://www.springboks.rugby/general/boksmart-medical-protocolconcussion-blue-card/.

  57. British Journal of Sports Medicine Blog. The blue card in rugby; BJSM; 2023. [cited 2023 Oct 17]. Available from: https://blogs.bmj.com/bjsm/2023/03/27/the-blue-card-in-rugby/.

  58. Finch CF, Donaldson A. A sports setting matrix for understanding the implementation context for community sport. Br J Sports Med. 2010;44(13):973–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. White PE, Newton JD, Makdissi M, Sullivan SJ, Davis G, McCrory P, et al. Knowledge about sports-related concussion: is the message getting through to coaches and trainers? Br J Sports Med. 2014;48(2):119–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Tafreschi D, Thiemann P. Doing it twice, getting it right? The effects of grade retention and course repetition in higher education. Econ Educ Rev. 2016;55:198–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. SA Rugby. BokSmart. c2023. Not dated [cited 2023 25 August]. Available from: https://www.springboks.rugby/general/boksmart-about/.

  62. Patricios J. BokSmart—South African rugby’s national rugby safety and injury prevention program. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2014;13(3):142–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Raftery M, Tucker R, Falvey ÉC. Getting tough on concussion: how welfare-driven law change may improve player safety—a Rugby Union experience. Br J Sports Med. 2021;55:527–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Gabbett TJ, Domrow N. Risk factors for injury in subelite rugby league players. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33(3):428–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Nutt S, McKay MJ, Gillies L, Peek K. Neck strength and concussion prevalence in football and rugby athletes. J Sci Med Sport. 2022;25(8):632–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Collins CL, Fletcher EN, Fields SK, Kluchurosky L, Rohrkemper MK, Comstock RD, et al. Neck strength: a protective factor reducing risk for concussion in high school sports. J Prim Prev. 2014;35(5):309–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Elliott J, Heron N, Versteegh T, Gilchrist IA, Webb M, Archbold P, et al. Injury reduction programs for reducing the incidence of sport-related head and neck injuries including concussion: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2021;51(11):2373–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Marshall SW, Loomis DP, Waller AE, Chalmers DJ, Bird YN, Quarrie KL, et al. Evaluation of protective equipment for prevention of injuries in rugby union. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34(1):113–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Knight JM, Nguyen JVK, Mitra B, Willmott C. Soft-shell headgear, concussion and injury prevention in youth team collision sports: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2021;11(6):e044320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Gamble T, Walker I. Wearing a bicycle helmet can increase risk taking and sensation seeking in adults. Psychol Sci. 2016;27(2):289–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Ellis M, Wenneberg R. Convulsions in a 17-year-old boy after a head injury sustained while playing hockey. CMAJ. 2016;188:443–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. SA Rugby. BokSmart Concussion Guide. c2023. Not dated [cited 2023 25 August]. Available from: https://www.springboks.rugby/media/i0qnf4fg/boksmartconcussion-guide-cropped.pdf.

  73. World Rugby. Fits and Seizures, c2020. Date unknown [cited 2023 26 July]. Available from: https://passport.world.rugby/player-welfare-medical/first-aid-inrugby/chapter-3-head-injuries-in-rugby-union/fits-and-seizures/.

  74. Echemendia RJ, Ahmed OH, Bailey CM, Bruce JM, Burma JS, Davis GA, et al. The Concussion Recognition Tool 6 (CRT6). Br J Sports Med. 2023;57(11):692–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Davis GA, Echemendia RJ, Ahmed OH, Anderson V, Blauwet C, Brett BL, et al. Child SCAT6. Br J Sports Med. 2023;57(11):636–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Echemendia RJ, Brett BL, Broglio S, Davis GA, Giza CC, Guskiewicz KM, et al. Sport concussion assessment tool™–6 (SCAT6). Br J Sports Med. 2023;57(11):622–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Echemendia RJ, Ahmed OH, Bailey CM, Bruce JM, Burma JS, Davis GA, et al. Introducing the Concussion Recognition Tool 6 (CRT6). Br J Sports Med. 2023;57(11):689–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. World Rugby. Recognise and Remove, c2020. Date unknown [cited 2023 26 July]. Available from: https://www.world.rugby/the-game/playerwelfare/medical/concussion/recognise-and-remove.

  79. World Rugby. Graduated Return to Play Poster, c2020. Date unknown [cited 2023 29 August]. Available from: https://resources.world.rugby/worldrugby/document/2021/04/20/9bebff3e-4d7b-43b6-994830281126cb46/GRTP_Poster_EN-2-.pdf.

  80. Bretzin AC, Covassin T, Fox ME, Petit KM, Savage JL, Walker LF, et al. Sex differences in the clinical incidence of concussions, missed school days, and time loss in high school student-athletes: part 1. Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(9):2263–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Bretzin AC, Covassin T, Wiebe DJ, Stewart W. Association of sex with adolescent soccer concussion incidence and characteristics. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(4):e218191.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Kirkwood G, Parekh N, Ofori-Asenso R, Pollock AM. Concussion in youth rugby union and rugby league: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(8):506–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. King DA, Hume PA, Hind K, Clark TN, Hardaker N. The incidence, cost, and burden of concussion in women’s rugby league and rugby union: a systematic review and pooled analysis. Sports Med. 2022;52(8):1751–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Gardner AJ, Iverson GL, Williams WH, Baker S, Stanwell P. A systematic review and meta-analysis of concussion in rugby union. Sports Med. 2014;44:1717–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Marar M, McIlvain NM, Fields SK, Comstock RD. Epidemiology of concussions among United States high school athletes in 20 sports. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(4):747–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. World Rugby. Women's Rugby 2023. Date unknown [cited 2023 29 August]. Available from: https://www.world.rugby/organisation/about-us/womens.

  87. SA School Sports. School Rugby First XV Rankings:24/04/2023. 2023. [cited 2023 August 29]. Available from: https://saschoolsports.co.za/school-rugby/.

  88. Michaelhouse. Sport: The grassroots of greatness. c2023. Date unknown [cited 2023 29 August]. Available from: https://www.michaelhouse.org/about/sport/.

  89. Roux J. SARU Safety Regulations and Medical Requirements Process 2016. 2016. Available from: http://bullscoaches.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/SARU-Safety-Regulations-and-Medical-Requirements-Process-Flow-2016.pdf.

  90. Brown JC, Cross M, England M, Finch CF, Fuller GW, Kemp SPT, et al. Guidelines for community-based injury surveillance in rugby union. J Sci Med Sport. 2019;22(12):1314–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Cosgrave M, Williams S. The epidemiology of concussion in professional rugby union in Ireland. Phys Ther Sport. 2019;35:99–105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. World Rugby. First Aid in Rugby, c2020. Date unknown [cited 2023 August 29]. Available from: https://passport.world.rugby/player-welfare-medical/first-aidin-rugby/.

  93. Rugby Football Union. HeadCase. Not dated [cited 2023 July 26]. Available from: https://www.englandrugby.com/participation/playing/player-welfare-rugbysafe/courses.

  94. Patricios J. BokSmart — South African rugby’s national rugby safety and injury prevention program. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2014;13(3):142–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Esquivel A, Haque S, Keating P, Marsh S, Lemos S. Concussion management, education, and return-to-play policies in high schools: a survey of athletic directors, athletic trainers, and coaches. Sports Health. 2013;5(3):258–62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) New Zealand Government. Managing concussion is everyone’s responsibility. 2022. [cited 2023 July 26]. Available from: https://www.acc.co.nz/newsroom/stories/managing-concussion-is-everyones-responsibility/.

  97. UK Government GOV.UK. Landmark concussion guidance for grassroots sport published. 2023. [cited 2023 July 26]. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/landmark-concussion-guidance-for-grassroots-sportpublished.

  98. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Get the facts about TBI. 2023. [cited 2023 July 26]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/traumaticbraininjury/get_the_facts.html.

  99. Shelley A, Horner K. Questionnaire surveys - sources of error and implications for design, reporting and appraisal. Br Dent J. 2021;230(4):251–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Beaudry MF, Beaudry AG, Benzinger BC, Gilliam BD, Haynes DE. Knowledge and perceptions of ulnar collateral ligament injuries in baseball players: a survey of NCAA head baseball coaches. Orthop J Sports Med. 2022;10(12):23259671221141440.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Diefenbach MA, Weinstein ND, O’Reilly J. Scales for assessing perceptions of health hazard susceptibility. Health Educ Res. 1933;8(2):181–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge that this research would not have been possible without the support of Mr. Dean Moodley, Chairperson of KZN High School’s Rugby Committee, the participating coaches, and Dr. Zelalum Getahun Dessie for his statistical support.

Funding

No funding was received for the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Physiotherapy Department, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa

    Daniel Garnett & Saul Cobbing

  2. Department of Sport, Health Sciences and Social Work, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK

    Daniel Garnett

  3. The Institute for Education Research, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada

    Saul Cobbing

  4. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    Saul Cobbing

  5. Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

    Carel Viljoen

  6. Amsterdam Collaboration On Health & Safety in Sports, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Movement Science, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    Carel Viljoen

  7. Wits Sport and Health (WiSH), School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

    Jon Patricios

Authors
  1. Daniel Garnett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Saul Cobbing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carel Viljoen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jon Patricios
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

DG study design; data acquisition; interpretation of data, preparation of the manuscript. JP study design; interpretation of data, preparation of the manuscript. SC study design; interpretation of data, preparation of the manuscript. CV interpretation of data, and preparation of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Garnett.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Permission to conduct the research study was granted by the UKZN Ethics committee BREC 00000961/2020. Study information was provided and informed consent was obtained from all participating subjects, who were adults.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Garnett, D., Cobbing, S., Viljoen, C. et al. High school rugby coaches’ knowledge and opinions of concussion in KwaZulu Natal province in South Africa: an ecological cross-sectional study. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil 16, 139 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-024-00930-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-024-00930-5

Keywords

BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation

ISSN: 2052-1847

Contact us