# The Case for Protective Headguards in Amateur Boxing and Implications for International Policy on Headguard Bans

## TL;DR

This article argues that headguards in amateur boxing help prevent injuries and questions the decision to ban them without sufficient evidence.

## Contribution

The article highlights the lack of evidence supporting headguard bans and calls for better collaboration in policy-making.

## Key findings

- Headguards are effective in preventing cuts and lacerations.
- There is insufficient evidence to justify headguard bans.
- Collaboration between boxing organizations is lacking and needs improvement.

## Abstract

The recent prohibition of headguards by the International Boxing Association (IBA; previously AIBA) has sparked worldwide controversy regarding safeguarding the health of athletes in the boxing community. Studies have evaluated the role of headguards in preventing concussion, cuts and lacerations and fractures. However, the evidence for improvement in these outcomes remains poorly characterised and a gap remains in the ability to inform evidence-based sport and health policy in this space. This Current Opinion article demonstrates the effectiveness of headguards in protecting against cuts and lacerations and notes there is insufficient evidence supporting headguard bans. Furthermore, this article highlights a gap in collaborative effort and communication between the IBA and smaller representative bodies, which is an important consideration for future policy reform.