Association Between Head Impact Exposure, Psychological Needs, and Indicators of Mental Health Among U.S. High School Tackle Football Players.

PURPOSE: Age of first exposure to tackle football and head impact kinematics have been used to examine the effect of head impacts on mental health outcomes. These measures coupled with retrospective and cross-sectional designs have contributed to conflicting results. The purpose of this study was to identify the effect of one season of head impact exposure, age of first exposure to football, and psychological need satisfaction on acute mental health outcomes in adolescent football players. METHODS: This prospective single-season cohort study used sensor-installed mouthguards to collect head impact exposure along with surveys to assess age of first exposure to football, psychological satisfaction, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and thriving from football players at four high schools (n = 91). Linear regression was used to test the association of head impact exposure, age of first exposure, and psychological satisfaction with acute mental health outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 9,428 impacts were recorded with a mean of 102 ± 113 impacts/player. Cumulative head impact exposure and age of first exposure were not associated with acute mental health outcomes at postseason or change scores from preseason to postseason. Greater psychological satisfaction was associated with fewer depressive symptoms (ß = -0.035, SE = 0.008, p = < .001), fewer anxiety symptoms (ß = -0.021, SE = 0.008, p = .010), and greater thriving scores (ß = 0.278, SE = 0.040, p = < .001) at postseason. DISCUSSION: This study does not support the premise that greater single-season head impact exposure or earlier age of first exposure to tackle football is associated with worse acute mental health indicators over the course of a single season in adolescent football players.

Change in Psychotropic Prescribing Patterns Among Youths in Foster Care Associated With a Peer-to-Peer Physician Consultation Program.

There has been growing concern about the safety and efficacy of psychotropic prescribing practices for children enrolled in Medicaid and in foster care.1 In response, accreditation organizations and policymakers have developed standards for optimal use of psychotropic medications among children.2 In addition, federal legislation has prompted states to implement monitoring programs to address quality and safety issues among vulnerable pediatric subpopulations.3,4 Here, we report findings from an evaluation of Indiana's program for foster youth, which used outlier case review followed by peer-to-peer consultation between prescribing physicians and child and adolescent psychiatrists. We observed clinically and statistically significant reductions in polypharmacy, off-label prescribing, inpatient hospitalizations, health care costs, and related outcomes among youths randomized to an immediate intervention group compared to no improvements in a waitlist control group.