Elbin R J, D'Amico Nathan R, McCarthy Matthew, Womble Melissa N, O'Connor Sydne, Schatz Philip
Department of Health, Human Performance and Recreation/Office for Sport Concussion Research, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AK, USA.
Inova Medical Group - Department of Orthopaedics & Sports Medicine, Inova Sports Medicine Concussion Program, Fairfax, VA, USA.
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2020 Apr 20;35(3):326-331. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acz072.
To compare neurocognitive scores between the Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) Quick Test (QT) and Online Versions in non-concussed high school athletes.
A sample of 47 high school athletes completed the ImPACT Online Version pre-season and the ImPACT QT approximately 3 months later. Paired sample t-tests and Pearson's correlations examined differences and relationships between the ImPACT batteries.
The ImPACT QT scores were significantly higher for performance on the Three Letters: Average Counted (p < .001, d = .88), Three Letters: Average Counted Correctly (p < .001, d = .80), and Symbol Match: Correct RT Visible (p < .001, d = .72), and Symbol Match: Correct RT Hidden (p = .002, d = .50) subtests. There were significant relationships for Three Letters: Average Counted (r = .85, p < .001), Three Letters: Average Counted Correctly (r = .82, p < .001), and Symbol Match: Total Correct Hidden (r = .40, p = .006) subtests.
Post-injury evaluation data using ImPACT QT should be compared to normative referenced data, and not to pre-season data from the ImPACT Online Version.
比较未发生脑震荡的高中运动员在脑震荡后即刻评估与认知测试（ImPACT）快速测试（QT）和在线版本之间的神经认知得分。
47名高中运动员的样本在赛季前完成了ImPACT在线版本测试，并在大约3个月后完成了ImPACT QT测试。配对样本t检验和Pearson相关性分析检验了ImPACT各测试组之间的差异和关系。
在“三个字母：平均计数”（p <.001，d =.88）、“三个字母：正确平均计数”（p <.001，d =.80）、“符号匹配：可见正确反应时间”（p <.001，d =.72）以及“符号匹配：隐藏正确反应时间”（p =.002，d =.50）子测试中，ImPACT QT得分显著更高。在“三个字母：平均计数”（r =.85，p <.001）、“三个字母：正确平均计数”（r =.82，p <.001）以及“符号匹配：隐藏正确总数”（r =.40，p =.006）子测试中存在显著相关性。
使用ImPACT QT的损伤后评估数据应与标准化参考数据进行比较，而不是与ImPACT在线版本的赛季前数据进行比较。
