RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated 2 different dual-task (DT) conditions during tandem gait (TG) to predict sport-related concussion (SRC) diagnosis. HYPOTHESIS: The best (fastest) single-task (ST) gait will differ between groups (controls vs SRC; baseline vs SRC), with auditory pure switching task (APST) response rate being the most important behavioral variable to aid prediction of SRC. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort design. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3. METHODS: A total of 409 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I student-athlete controls and 21 team-physician-diagnosed SRC participated. All data were collected at preseason physicals (baseline) and within 7 days of injury for SRC. Each participant completed 3 conditions of TG in a pseudorandomized order: (1) ST, (2) DT with serial-7s (SS) subtractions, and (3) DT with APST. Outcomes of time-to-complete for TG and behavioral (eg, responses per second) for SS and APST were recorded for each trial. RESULTS: ST Trials 2 (P = 0.03) and 3 (P = 0.01) were significantly different between controls and SRC. ST Trial 3 (P = 0.04) was significantly different between baseline and SRC. Average responses per second for APST were significantly different between- (P < 0.01) and within- (P = 0.01) group. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that ST is significantly slower after SRC. However, DT (both SS and APST) time-to-complete are also important variables when predicting the SRC diagnosis. It is advised that both ST and DT be administered when making clinical decisions regarding postural instability after SRC. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The best ST TG time to complete gait is an important objective marker of concussion while DT paradigms, specifically SS and APST, are highly variable. DT may be more useful for clinical observable signs of SRC. Both SS and APST have unique usefulness, but APST response rate per second can be relied upon numerically for clinical decisions.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR) has been explored to improve baseline and postinjury assessments in sport-related concussion (SRC). Some experience symptoms related to VR, unrelated to concussion. This may deter use of vestibular/ocular motor screening (VOMS) using VR. Baseline VR VOMS symptomatology differentiates baseline from overall symptomatology. HYPOTHESIS: There will be no difference between current clinical manual VOMS (MAN), a clinical prototype (PRO), and VR for symptom provocation change score (SPCS) and near point of convergence (NPC) average score in a healthy population and sex differences among the 3 modes of administration. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3. METHODS: A total of 688 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I student-athletes completed VOMS using 3 methods (MAN, N = 111; female athletes, N = 47; male athletes, N = 64; average age, 21 years; PRO, N = 365; female athletes, N = 154; male athletes, N = 211; average age, 21 years; VR, N = 212; female athletes, N = 78; male athletes, N = 134; average age = 20 years) over a 3-year period (2019-2021) during annual baseline testing. Exclusion criteria were as follows: self-reported motion sickness in the past 6 months, existing or previous neurological insult, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, learning disabilities, or noncorrected vision impairment. Administration of MAN followed the current clinical protocols, PRO used a novel prototype, and VR used an HTC Vive Pro Eye head mounted display. Symptom provocation was compared using Mann-Whitney U tests across each VOMS subtest with total SPCS and NPC average by each method. RESULTS: MAN had significantly (P < 0.01) more baseline SPCS (MAN = 0.466 ± 1.165, PRO = 0.163 ± 0.644, VR = 0.161 ± 0.933) and significantly (P < 0.01) and more SPCS (MAN = 0.396 ± 1.081, PRO = 0.128 ± 0.427, VR = 0.48 ± 0.845) when compared with PRO and VR. NPC average measurements for VR (average, 2.99 ± 0.684 cm) were significantly greater than MAN (average, 2.91 ± 3.35 cm; P < 0.01; Cohen's d = 0.03) and PRO (average, 2.21 ± 1.81 cm; P < 0.01; Cohen's d = 0.57). For sex differences, female athletes reported greater SPCS with PRO (female athletes, 0.29 ± 0.87; male athletes, 0.06 ± 0.29; P < 0.01) but not in VR or MAN. CONCLUSION: Using a VR system to administer the VOMS may not elicit additional symptoms, resulting in fewer false positives and is somewhat stable between sexes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: VOMS may allow for standardization among administrators and reduce possible false positives.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Purpose The objective of this study is to present preliminary on-field head kinematics data for NCAA Division I American football players through closely matched pre-season workouts both with and without Guardian Caps (GCs). Methods 42 NCAA Division I American football players wore instrumented mouthguards (iMMs) for 6 closely matched workouts, 3 in traditional helmets (PRE) and 3 with GCs (POST) affixed to the exterior of their helmets. This includes 7 players who had consistent data through all workouts. Results There was no significant difference between the collapsed mean values for the entire sample between PRE and POST for peak linear acceleration (PLA) (PRE=16.3, POST=17.2Gs; p=0.20), Peak Angular Acceleration (PAA) (PRE=992.1, POST=1029.4rad/s2; p=0.51 and the total amount of impacts (PRE=9.3, POST=9.7; p=0.72). Similarly, no difference was observed between PRE and POST for PLA (PRE=16.1, POST=17.2Gs; p=0.32), PAA (PRE=951.2, POST=1038.0rad/s2; p=0.29 and total impacts (PRE=9.6, POST=9.7; p=0.32) between sessions for the 7 repeated players. Conclusion These data suggest no difference in head kinematics data (PLA, PAA and total impacts) when GCs are worn. This study suggests GCs are not effective in reducing the magnitude of head impacts experienced by NCAA Division I American football players.

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: The Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) is one of the most widely used computerized neurocognitive assessment batteries in athletics, serving as both a baseline and post-injury assessment. It has become increasingly popular to administer the ImPACT baseline test in an un-supervised remote environment, however, it is unknown if the lack of supervision affects the test-retest reliability. OBJECTIVE: To establish the minimal detectable change (MDC) of composite scores from the ImPACT test when administered to National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I student-athletes in an un-supervised remote environment before two consecutive athletic seasons. DESIGN: Cross-Sectional. SETTING: Participants were provided with a unique link and detailed written instructions on how to complete the ImPACT test at home. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: NCAA Division I student-athletes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Remote ImPACT baseline test results from the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 athletic seasons were analyzed. The MDC was calculated at the 95%, 90%, and 80% confidence intervals for each of the ImPACT composite scores, as well as the average and standard deviation. RESULTS: The MDC at the 95% confidence interval was found to be 18.6 for the verbal memory composite score, 24.44 for visual memory, 8.76 for visual motor, 0.14 for reaction time, and 6.13 for impulse control. One-way repeated measures MANOVA, repeated measures ANOVA, and Wilcoxon signed-ranks test all suggest no significant difference between the composite scores and impulse control between time points. CONCLUSIONS: The ImPACT test composite scores and impulse control did not significantly change between the two remote testing time points when administered approximately a year between testing. Our study suggests the MDC serve as a clinician's guide for evaluating changes in ImPACT baseline scores and in making clinical judgments on sports-related concussion when the test is administered at home.