A case-control study of tackle based head impact event (HIE) risk factors from the first three seasons of the National Rugby League Women's competition.

Objective: The tackle is the most injurious event in rugby league and carries the greatest risk of concussion. This study aims to replicate previous research conducted in professional men's rugby league by examining the association between selected tackle characteristics and head impact events (HIEs) in women's professional rugby league. Methods: We reviewed and coded 83 tackles resulting in an HIE and every tackle (6,318 tackles) that did not result in an HIE for three seasons (2018-2020) of the National Rugby League Women's (NRLW) competition. Tackle height, body position of the tackler and ball carrier, as well as the location of head contact with the other player's body were evaluated. Propensity of each situation that caused an HIE was calculated as HIEs per 1,000 tackles. Results: The propensity for tacklers to sustain an HIE was 6.60 per 1,000 tackles (95% CI: 4.87-8.92), similar to that of the ball carrier (6.13 per 1,000 tackles, 95% CI: 4.48-8.38). The greatest risk of an HIE to either the tackler or ball carrier occurred when head proximity was above the sternum (21.66 per 1,000 tackles, 95% CI: 16.55-28.35). HIEs were most common following impacts between two heads (287.23 HIEs per 1,000 tackles, 95% CI: 196.98-418.84). The lowest propensity for both tackler (2.65 per 1,000 tackles, 95% CI: 0.85-8.20) and ball carrier HIEs (1.77 per 1,000 tackles, 95% CI: 0.44-7.06) occurred when the head was in proximity to the opponent's shoulder and arm. No body position (upright, bent or unbalanced/off feet) was associated with an increased propensity of HIE to either tackler or ball carrier. Conclusions: In the NRLW competition, tacklers and ball carriers have a similar risk of sustaining an HIE during a tackle, differing from men's NRL players, where tacklers have a higher risk of HIEs. Further studies involving larger samples need to validate these findings. However, our results indicate that injury prevention initiatives in women's rugby league should focus on how the ball carrier engages in contact during the tackle as well as how the tackler executes the tackle.

Ideal models of good inpatient care for adults with intellectual disability: Lessons from England.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, a significant proportion of inpatient facilities for people with intellectual disabilities and/or autism has been de-commissioned in England, This has resulted in individuals with intellectual disabilities being sent to distant hospitals far away from their families and carers leading to challenges in follow-up, community care and interventions. The impact of de-institutionalisation, has often caused patient trauma, family distress and subsequent discharge difficulties. Not every individual with intellectual disabilities and/or autism requires inpatient care but inpatient care when needed has to be local, adequate and appropriate. AIMS: To evaluate current evidence of utility of inpatient models for people with intellectual disabilities and outline best clinical practice. METHOD: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science were searched with key search terms. The search was conducted by the information specialist and identified abstracts screened further for inclusion criteria, methodological issues, and other appropriate characteristics. Twenty-three papers were included in the rapid review. Papers shortlisted had the inclusion criteria applied against the full text version independently by two reviewers. Disagreements regarding eligibility of studies was resolved by discussion and consensus within the project team. Key data related to in-patient models of care was extracted from the included papers, which included year of study, design, study objectives, target population, method/s tested, outcomes reported, country of study/studies, and results. Data extraction was performed by two reviewers and reviewed by the project team. RESULTS: From the review of services for people with intellectual disabilities, we came across four broad models/frameworks/approaches. Evidence on what worked for inpatient service provision tended to be based on models developed and implemented locally. CONCLUSIONS: We make recommendations for the best clinical practice and standards. Both clinical service providers and policymakers need to be aware of specific needs of individuals with intellectual disability and/or autism.

Keep safe: The when, why and how of epilepsy risk communication.

PURPOSE: Risk communication between clinicians and people with epilepsy (PWE) and their families is under researched. There is limited guidance about when and how to have these discussions. This paper explores the current evidence on quality of risk related conversations in epilepsy and suggests a concept of an evidence-based guideline for person centred structured risk communication. METHODS: A literature search of four electronic database, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, PUBMED, and CINAHL, was conducted by two independent reviewers using relevant search terms following the principals of the PRISMA guidance. No limits were applied. Supplementary searches included using backwards and forwards citation searching. A predesigned inclusion and exclusion criteria was administered to the identified results. RESULTS: From 376 results identified, 17 studies met the final criteria of which ten were quantitative, five qualitative and two mixed methods. Perspectives of PWE and clinicians were represented. Extracted data was clustered into three domains: communication initiation (e.g. timing, individual tailoring); communication methods (preference for face to face with neurologists); and communication content (acknowledging the anxiety produced by risk communication, the benefits of being self-aware, normalising risk etc.). No papers focused on conversation structure (e.g. helpful phrases), or the best locations to hold conversations. CONCLUSION: More research is needed to develop structured communication of risk. An attempt has been made to put current evidence into this format. Clearer guidance will enhance clinicians' confidence in communicating person centred epilepsy risk with PWE and their families thus improving outcomes.