Academic literature on the topic 'Rugby Union football players – Ireland – Biography'

AbstractRugby has a higher injury burden than other popular sports, such as football. Athletes who are forced to retire as a result of injury are associated with poor mental health. With its high injury burden, professional rugby players might be at risk of mental health conditions associated with injury-related forced retirement. This study aimed to compare mental health between former professional rugby players who were and weren’t forced to retire. A questionnaire including the 4DSQ (distress), GHQ-12 (anxiety/depression), PROMIS short-form (sleep disturbance) and AUDIT-C (alcohol misuse) was completed by retired professional players from Ireland, France and South Africa. The questionnaire asked players whether or not they were forced to retire, as well as the reason for retirement. Players forced to retire were more than twice as likely to report symptoms of distress in comparison to those that retired voluntarily (odds ratio: 2.1, 95% confidence interval: 1.2–3.6, p<0.001). None of the other mental health measures (anxiety/depression, sleep disturbance or alcohol misuse) were associated with forced retirement. In conclusion, rugby players that were forced to retire may require support structures and longitudinal monitoring. Future studies should begin monitoring players during their careers to accurately assess the effect of retirement on mental health.

AbstractIntroductionThere is currently limited guidance for researchers on Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) for preclinical spinal cord research, leading to uncertainty about design and implementation. This study aimed to develop evidence‐informed principles to support preclinical spinal cord researchers to incorporate PPI into their research.MethodsThis study used a modified Delphi method with the aim of establishing consensus on a set of principles for PPI in spinal cord research. Thirty‐eight stakeholders including researchers, clinicians and people living with spinal cord injury took part in the expert panel. Participants were asked to rate their agreement with a series of statements relating to PPI in preclinical spinal cord research over two rounds. As part of Round 2, they were also asked to rate statements as essential or desirable.ResultsThirty‐eight statements were included in Round 1, after which five statements were amended and two additional statements were added. After Round 2, consensus (> 75% agreement) was reached for a total of 27 principles, with 13 rated as essential and 14 rated as desirable. The principles with highest agreement related to diversity in representation among PPI contributors, clarity of the purpose of PPI and effective communication.ConclusionThis research developed a previously unavailable set of evidence‐informed principles to inform PPI in preclinical spinal cord research. These principles provide guidance for researchers seeking to conduct PPI in preclinical spinal cord research and may also inform PPI in other preclinical disciplines.Patient and Public Involvement StatementThis study was conducted as part of a project aiming to develop PPI in preclinical spinal cord injury research associated with an ongoing research collaboration funded by the Irish Rugby Football Union Charitable Trust (IRFU CT) and the Science Foundation Ireland Centre for Advanced Materials and BioEngineering Research (SFI AMBER), with research conducted by the Tissue Engineering Research Group (TERG) at the RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences. The project aims to develop an advanced biomaterials platform for spinal cord repair and includes a PPI Advisory Panel comprising researchers, clinicians and seriously injured rugby players to oversee the work of the project. PPI is included in this study through the involvement of members of the PPI Advisory Panel in the conceptualisation of this research, review of findings, identification of key points for discussion and preparation of the study manuscript as co‐authors.