Richard W Nutton

Objectives This study set out to pursue means of reducing mismatch in schoolboy rugby players. The primary objective was to determine whether application of previously reported thresholds of height and grip strength could be used to distinguish those 15-year-old boys appropriate to play under-18 school rugby from their peers. A secondary objective was to obtain normative data for height, weight and grip strength and to assess the variation within that data of current schoolboy rugby players. Design Cross-sectional cohort study. Setting 3 Scottish schools and ‘Regional Assessment Centres’ organised by the Scottish Rugby Union. Participants 472 rugby playing youths aged 15 years (Regional Assessment Centres) and 382 schoolboys aged between 12 and 18 years (three schools). Outcome measures Height, weight and grip strength. Results 97% of 15-year-olds achieved the height and grip strength thresholds based on previous reported values. Larger mean values and wide variation of height, weight and grip strength were recorded in the schoolboy cohort. However, using the mean values of the cohort of 17-year-olds as a new threshold, only 7.7% of 15-year-olds would pass these thresholds. Conclusions Large morphological variation was observed in schoolboy rugby players of the same age. Physical maturity tests described in earlier literature as pre-participation screening for contact sports were not applicable to current day 15-year-old rugby players. New criteria were measured and found to be better at identifying those 15-year-old players who had sufficient physical development to play senior school rugby.

Modifications in the design of knee replacements have been proposed in order to maximise flexion. We performed a prospective double-blind randomised controlled trial to compare the functional outcome, including maximum knee flexion, in patients receiving either a standard or a high flexion version of the NexGen legacy posterior stabilised total knee replacement. A total of 56 patients, half of whom received each design, were assessed pre-operatively and at one year after operation using knee scores and analysis of range of movement using electrogoniometry. For both implant designs there was a significant improvement in the function component of the knee scores (p < 0.001) and the maximum range of flexion when walking on the level, ascending and descending a slope or stairs (all p < 0.001), squatting (p = 0.020) and stepping into a bath (p = 0.024). There was no significant difference in outcome, including the maximum knee flexion, between patients receiving the standard and high flexion designs of this implant.