Evaluating the Effect of Policy Prohibiting Body Checking on Physical Contacts in U15 and U18 Youth Ice Hockey Leagues.

OBJECTIVE: To compare physical contacts (PCs) and head contacts (HCs) in nonelite U15 (ages 13-14) and U18 (ages 15-17) ice hockey players in body checking (BC) and non-BC leagues. DESIGN: Cohort video analysis study. SETTING: Ice hockey arenas in Calgary, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Players from 13 BC and 13 non-BC games at the nonelite U15 and U18 levels (n = 52 total games). ASSESSMENT OF RISK FACTORS: Games were videotaped and analyzed to compare PC variables between leagues allowing and prohibiting BC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Validated methodology for PC type (trunk PC and other types of PC with limb/stick/head), intensity (low and high intensity), and HC. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were estimated using Poisson regression (controlling for cluster by team game and offset by player minutes) to compare the incidence of PCs in BC and non-BC games. RESULTS: The rate of trunk PCs was lower in the non-BC leagues for both U15 (IRR = 0.50, 99% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43-0.58) and U18 (IRR = 0.56, 99% CI: 0.46-0.67) players. This was most significant for BC contacts (U15: IRR = 0.18, 99% CI: 0.11-0.29; U18: IRR = 0.16, 99% CI: 0.08-0.34), although also significant for body contacts (U15: IRR = 0.54, 99% CI: 0.46-0.64; U18: IRR = 0.58, 99% CI: 0.48-0.70), other PCs, (U15: IRR = 0.60, 99% CI: 0.45-0.78; U18: IRR = 0.71, 99% CI: 0.58-0.88), and HCs (U15: IRR = 0.40, 99% CI: 0.22-0.71; U18: IRR = 0.37, 99% CI: 0.25-0.57). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of BC was 82% lower in the U15 and 84% lower in U18 levels not allowing BC, with lower HC and other PC rates also in non-BC leagues. These findings demonstrate high adherence with BC policy change in youth ice hockey.

Incidence of Head Contacts, Penalties, and Player Contact Behaviors in Youth Ice Hockey: Evaluating the "Zero Tolerance for Head Contact" Policy Change.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the risk of concussion in youth ice hockey, Hockey Canada implemented a national "zero tolerance for head contact" (HC) policy in 2011. A previous cohort study revealed higher concussion rates after this implementation in players aged 11 to 14 years. However, it is unknown whether the elevated risk was due to higher HC rates or factors such as increased concussion awareness and reporting. PURPOSE: To compare the rates of primary and secondary HCs and HC policy enforcement in elite U15 ice hockey leagues (players <15 years) before (2008-2009) and after (2013-2014) the zero-tolerance policy change. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A total of 32 elite U15 games before (n2008-2009 = 16; 510 players) and after (n2013-2014 = 16; 486 players) HC policy implementation were video recorded. Videos were analyzed with validated criteria for identifying HC types (primary/direct contact by players [HC1], secondary/indirect contact via boards, glass, or ice surface [HC2]) and other player-to-player contact behavior. Referee-assessed penalties were cross-referenced with the official Hockey Canada casebook, and penalty types were displayed using proportions. Univariate Poisson regression (adjusted for cluster by team game, offset by game length [minutes]) was used to estimate HC incidence rates (IRs) and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) between cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 506 HCs were analyzed, 261 before HC policy implementation (IR, 16.6/100 team minutes) and 245 after implementation (IR, 15.5/100 team minutes). The HC1 rate (IRR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.86-1.28) and HC2 rate (IRR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.50-1.11) did not significantly differ before versus after implementation. Only 12.0% and 13.6% of HC1s were penalized pre- and postimplementation, respectively. Before implementation, HC1s were commonly penalized as roughing or elbowing penalties (59%), while after implementation, HC1s were penalized with the HC penalty (76%), and only 8% as roughing or elbowing. CONCLUSION: Despite implementation of the "zero tolerance for HC" policy, there was no difference in the rate of HC1s and HC2s or the proportion of HC1 penalized from before to after implementation. This research is instrumental in informing Hockey Canada's future referee training and rule enforcement modifications.

The Effect of the "Zero Tolerance for Head Contact" Rule Change on the Risk of Concussions in Youth Ice Hockey Players.

BACKGROUND: Ice hockey is a popular winter sport in Canada. Concussions account for the greatest proportion of all injuries in youth ice hockey. In 2011, a policy change enforcing "zero tolerance for head contact" was implemented in all leagues in Canada. PURPOSE: To determine if the risk of game-related concussions and more severe concussions (ie, resulting in >10 days of time loss) and the mechanisms of a concussion differed for Pee Wee class (ages 11-12 years) and Bantam class (ages 13-14 years) players after the 2011 "zero tolerance for head contact" policy change compared with players in similar divisions before the policy change. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: The retrospective cohort included Pee Wee (most elite 70%, 2007-2008; n = 891) and Bantam (most elite 30%, 2008-2009; n = 378) players before the rule change and Pee Wee (2011-2012; n = 588) and Bantam (2011-2012; n = 242) players in the same levels of play after the policy change. Suspected concussions were identified by a team designate and referred to a sport medicine physician for diagnosis. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were estimated based on multiple Poisson regression analysis, controlling for clustering by team and other important covariates and offset by game-exposure hours. Incidence rates based on the mechanisms of a concussion were estimated based on univariate Poisson regression analysis. RESULTS: The risk of game-related concussions increased after the head contact rule in Pee Wee (IRR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.20-2.86) and Bantam (IRR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.17-5.24) players. The risk of more severe concussions increased after the head contact rule in Pee Wee (IRR, 4.12; 95% CI, 2.00-8.50) and Bantam (IRR, 7.91; 95% CI, 3.13-19.94) players. The rates of concussions due to body checking and direct head contact increased after the rule change. CONCLUSION: The "zero tolerance for head contact" policy change did not reduce the risk of game-related concussions in Pee Wee or Bantam class ice hockey players. Increased concussion awareness and education after the policy change may have contributed to the increased risk of concussions found after the policy change.