Suppr超能文献

优化美国大学体育协会学生运动员和军校学员脑震荡基线评估的管理顺序

Optimizing Order of Administration for Concussion Baseline Assessment Among NCAA Student-Athletes and Military Cadets.

作者信息

Lempke Landon B, Lynall Robert C, Anderson Melissa N, McCrea Michael A, McAllister Thomas W, Broglio Steven P, Schmidt Julianne D

机构信息

UGA Concussion Research Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, University of Georgia, Ramsey Student Center, 330 River Rd., Athens, GA, 30606, USA.

Division of Sports Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Sports Med. 2022 Jan;52(1):165-176. doi: 10.1007/s40279-021-01493-y. Epub 2021 Jun 15.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Concussion pre-injury (i.e., baseline) assessments serve as a benchmark comparison point in the event an individual sustains a concussion and allows clinicians to compare to post-injury measures. However, baseline assessments must reflect the individual's true and most optimized performance to serve as a useful comparison. Mental fatigue and motivation throughout baseline testing may alter individual assessment performance, indicating an order of administration (OoA) may play an influential role in assessment outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the influence concussion baseline battery OoA has on symptom, postural stability, cognitive screening, and computerized neurocognitive test outcomes.

METHODS

We employed a retrospective observational cohort study to examine healthy collegiate student-athletes and military cadets (n = 2898, 19.0 ± 1.4 years, 66.1% male, 75.6% white, 54.4% Division-I) baseline assessment performance on the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT; total symptom number and severity), Balance Error Scoring System (BESS; total error scores), Standardized Assessment of Concussion (SAC; total score), and Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) domain scores (verbal and visual memory, visual-motor speed, reaction time). Assessments were binned to beginning, middle, or end tertiles based upon OoA. We used one-way ANOVAs with Tukey post-hoc t tests, 95% confidence intervals (CI), and Cohen's d effect sizes for significant models (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

SCAT total symptom number (mean difference = 2.23; 95% CI 1.76-2.70; d = 0.49, p < 0.001) and severity (mean difference = 5.58; 95% CI 4.42-6.74; d = 0.50; p < 0.001) were lower when completed at the end of baseline testing compared to the middle. Total BESS errors were 1.06 lower when completed at the middle relative to the end (95% CI 0.43-1.69; d = 0.17; p = 0.001). Total SAC scores were better at the beginning relative to middle (mean difference = 0.58; 95% CI 0.25-0.90; d = 0.33; p < 0.001) and end (mean difference = 0.44; 95% CI 0.16-0.73; d = 0.24; p = 0.001). Verbal memory, visual memory, and reaction time performance were highest at the beginning (p ≤ 0.002), while visual-motor speed performance was highest at the middle (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Completing baseline assessments in the order of (1) ImPACT, (2) SAC, (3) BESS, and (4) SCAT symptom checklist may improve performance across assessments collectively. Clinicians and researchers should consider completing baseline assessments in this order when possible to potentially aid in optimizing concussion baseline assessment performance and maximize post-concussion comparisons.

摘要

背景

脑震荡伤前(即基线)评估在个体遭受脑震荡时作为一个基准比较点,使临床医生能够与伤后测量结果进行比较。然而,基线评估必须反映个体的真实且最优化的表现,才能作为有效的比较。在整个基线测试过程中的精神疲劳和动机可能会改变个体评估表现,这表明评估的实施顺序(OoA)可能在评估结果中发挥重要作用。

目的

研究脑震荡基线测试组合的实施顺序对症状、姿势稳定性、认知筛查和计算机化神经认知测试结果的影响。

方法

我们采用回顾性观察队列研究,以检查健康的大学生运动员和军校学员(n = 2898,19.0 ± 1.4岁,66.1%为男性,75.6%为白人,54.4%为一级联盟运动员)在运动脑震荡评估工具(SCAT;症状总数和严重程度)、平衡误差评分系统(BESS;总误差分数)、标准化脑震荡评估(SAC;总分)以及脑震荡后即刻评估和认知测试(ImPACT)领域分数(言语和视觉记忆、视觉运动速度、反应时间)方面的基线评估表现。评估根据实施顺序分为开始、中间或末尾三分位数。对于有显著差异的模型,我们使用单因素方差分析以及Tukey事后t检验、95%置信区间(CI)和科恩d效应量(α = 0.05)。

结果

与中间阶段相比,在基线测试末尾完成时,SCAT症状总数(平均差异 = 2.23;95% CI 1.76 - 2.70;d = 0.49,p < 0.001)和严重程度(平均差异 = 5.58;95% CI 4.42 - 6.74;d = 0.50;p < 0.001)更低。与末尾相比,在中间完成时,BESS总误差低1.06(95% CI 0.43 - 1.69;d = 0.17;p = 0.001)。与中间(平均差异 = 0.58;95% CI 0.25 - 0.90;d = 0.33;p < 0.001)和末尾(平均差异 = 0.44;95% CI 0.16 - 0.73;d = 0.24;p = 0.001)相比,开始时SAC总分更高。言语记忆、视觉记忆和反应时间表现开始时最高(p ≤ 0.002),而视觉运动速度表现中间时最高(p = 0.001)。

结论

按照(1)ImPACT、(2)SAC、(3)BESS和(4)SCAT症状清单的顺序完成基线评估可能会整体提高各项评估的表现。临床医生和研究人员在可能的情况下应考虑按此顺序完成基线评估,以潜在地帮助优化脑震荡基线评估表现并使脑震荡后比较最大化。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验