Victor Radley showed signs of convulsing/seizuring after suffering a concussion there. Despite the graphic nature of the incident the presence of immediate convulsions is not associated with adverse results (via scans/recovery time) or risk of future seizures. Hope he is OK
Radley sitting up/communicating in the sheds, great news. Immediate convulsions rarely considered a factor when trying to classify concussion severity, or guiding treatment/return. prospects for recovery will be guided by the presence of the concussion rather than the convulsing
Had a few say im trying to downplay the severity of the incident - apologies if it’s come across like that to anyone. If anything I’m trying to “upplay” the severity of all concussions. However you felt about Radley here - your concern for his welfare, how long you thought he
should require on the sideline - I would argue that’s how you should start feeling for every player who suffers a concussion. With convulsions not influencing concussion severity there’s every chance it’s as minor or severe as all other mild traumatic brain injuries (concussions)
In terms of past return to play times of players who suffered concussive convulsions:
Corey Oates (2017) - 1 week
Shaun Lane (2018) - 1 week
Michael Morgan (2019) - 3 weeks (2nd concussion in 12 days)
Michael Chee Kam (2019) - 1 week
Michael Chee Kam (2020) - 8 weeks
Return to play from concussion in the NRL has become more conservative in recent seasons. But like every concussion, convulsions or not, it’s almost impossible to predict Radley’s return to play at this early stage. Will have to see how he progresses through protocols
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
More NRL rule changes announced, some aim to further increase speed of the game & player fatigue. Was an increase in major injuries (5+ weeks recovery) with rule changes this season, but how much due to short prep time for teams (3 weeks) + COVID challenges?
Some COVID challenges may still exist next season (gameday travel, limited support staff in bubble?), but definitely benefit in announcing changes with 3 months til Round 1 giving teams a chance to prepare/tailor training.
⬆️ in speed/fatigue doesn’t always mean ⬆️ performance or player safety (for a long read see thread below). The key is finding a balance between fatigue & freshness of players. Do the new changes move the balance too far towards fatigue? 2021 injury rates will be very interesting
Hot topic lately, so time for a concussion/HIA thread.
The testing that we see the trainer performing on field, & the “HIA” the player undergoes off the field is part of the Sports Concussion Assessment Tool, or SCAT5. A useful resource:
So what is the “HIA”? Often more commonly used to describe the off field portion of the SCAT5 (even though assessment is performed on field too). A great video guide courtesy of the great @dr_ameeribrahim below:
Now as we saw with Munster, & have seen with others in the past, players can pass this off field testing (compared to baseline levels) & yet still be unable to return. In Munster’s case this was due to the presence of a “category 1” symptom when video of the incident was reviewed
Quick thread on Origin this year & injury risk. Firstly regular season stats, looking at turnarounds/days between games (7 days in Origin this year).
NRL injuries/1000 regular season hours:
7 day turnaround - 51.4
10 day turnaround - 58.3
So for a 3 game Origin series, expected injuries going by regular season injury rate:
7 days: 5.3 injuries
10 days: 6.1 injuries
Regular season games later in the year don’t have added risk, with no trend regarding injury rates & round in the season found in recent years.
Major injuries (5+wks recovery) even appear to drop off late in the year, with none occurring in the final 3 rounds of seasons 2016-2018. In the finals series the number of players missing time due to injury ⬇️ (players more willing to carry injury/take risks in important games).
With “Lisfranc” being the new NRL injury buzzword (following on from syndesmosis) thought a quick explainer thread was in order.
Lisfranc injury = injury to the ligaments/bones/joints of the midfoot (more commonly known in the past as a midfoot sprain)
First described by Jacques Lisfranc, a field Dr in Napoleon’s army, to describe a foot injury commonly seen in soldiers who fell from their horse & foot got caught in the stirrups. In those times a Lisfranc injury was often treated by amputating the forefoot (remove the toes 🤭)
How does it happen?
Most commonly contact injuries; player landing on another’s heel or twisting the midfoot. But growing number of non-contact Lisfranc injuries; player changes direction/steps leaving forefoot planted while rest of foot moves/twists
Plenty of discussion about reducing the interchange with reference to injury rates, fatigue and “bringing back the little man”. Wanted to discuss what evidence suggests a reduction in interchange would do to injury prevalence (spoiler: it’s not set in stone). Thread ⬇️
There’s 2 main schools of thought:
- Increased interchange = ⬆️ speed & power of players, ⬆️ collision forces so traumatic injury rates ⬆️
- Decreased interchange = ⬆️ fatigue, players exposed to risk events when fatigued, decision making impaired, ⬆️ soft tissue strain rates
In 2001 the NRL went from unlimited to 12 interchanges. Evidence at 1 club showed:
- A significant ⬇️ in players leaving the field due to injury
- But this ⬇️ didnt lead to signifificant change in number of players who were injured & unable to return to the field