Single-Task and Dual-Task Gait Performance After Sport-Related Concussion: A Machine Learning Statistical Approach.

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.

Minimal Detectable Change for the ImPACT Subtests at Baseline.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the minimal detectable change (MDC) of the subtests that comprise the composite scores from remotely administered Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) baselines. METHOD: Remote ImPACT baseline data from 172 (male = 45, female = 127) National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I student-athletes from the 2020 and 2021 athletic preseasons were used to calculate the MDC at the 95%, 90%, and 80% confidence intervals (CIs) for all subtest scores used to generate the four core composite scores and the impulse control composite. RESULTS: The MDCs for the verbal memory subtests at the 95% CI were 10.31 for word memory percent correct, 4.68 for symbol match total correct hidden, and 18.25 for three letters percentage correct. Visual memory subtest MDCs were 19.03 for design memory total percent correct and 4.90 for XO total correct memory. Visual motor speed subtest MDCs were 18.89 for XO total correct interference and 5.40 for three letters average counted correctly. Reaction time (RT) MDCs were 0.12 for XO average correct, 0.95 for symbol match average correct RT, and 0.28 for color match average correct. Impulse control MDCs were 5.97 for XO total incorrect and 1.15 for color match total commissions. One-way repeated measures MANOVA, repeated measures ANOVAs, and Wilcoxon signed-ranks test all suggested no significant difference between any subtests across two remote ImPACT baselines. CONCLUSIONS: The ImPACT subtest scores did not significantly change between athletic seasons. Our study suggests the subtests be evaluated in conjunction with the composite scores to provide additional metrics for clinical interpretation.

Preliminary Examination of Guardian Cap Head Impact Kinematics Using Instrumented Mouthguards.

CONTEXT: Guardian Caps (GCs) are currently the most popular external helmet-add on designed to reduce the head impact magnitude experienced by American football players. GCs have been endorsed by influential professional organizations, however few studies evaluating the efficacy of GCs are publicly available. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to present preliminary on-field head kinematics data for NCAA Division I American football players using instrumented mouthguards through closely matched pre-season workouts both with and without GCs. DESIGN: Case Series. SETTING: The study took place during the 2022 American football pre-season. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: 25 Male NCAA Division I student-athletes participating in American football completed some portion of the 6 workouts included in this study. Of the 25 total participants, 7 completed all 6 workouts using their instrumented mouthguards. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The peak linear acceleration (PLA), peak angular acceleration (PAA) and total impacts were collected using instrumented mouthguards (iMG) during 3 pre-season workouts using traditional helmets (TRAD), and 3 with Guardian Caps used in additional to a traditional helmet (GC). The TRAD and GC values for PLA, PAA and total impacts were analyzed using ANOVAs. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the collapsed mean values for the entire sample between TRAD and GC for PLA (TRAD=16.3±2.0, GC=17.2±3.3Gs; p=0.20), PAA (TRAD=992.1±209.2, GC=1029.4±261.1rad/s2; p=0.51 and the total amount of impacts (TRAD=9.3±4.7, GC=9.7±5.7; p=0.72). Similarly, no difference was observed between TRAD and GC for PLA (TRAD=16.1±1.2, GC=17.2±2.79Gs; p=0.32), PAA (TRAD=951.2±95.4, GC=1038.0±166.8rad/s2; p=0.29 and total impacts (TRAD=9.6±4.2, GC=9.7±5.04s; p=0.32) between sessions for the7 repeated players. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest no difference in head kinematics data (PLA, PAA and total impacts) when GCs are worn. This study suggests GCs may not be effective in reducing the magnitude of head impacts experienced by NCAA Division I American football players.

Preliminary Examination of Guardian Cap Head Impact Data Using Instrumented Mouthguards.

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.

Minimal detectable change for the ImPACT test administered remotely.

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.