Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Concussion is a growing public health concern and generating concussion prevention programs depends on identifying high-risk sports and characteristics. Identifying the roles of sport, sex, and participation level (e.g., high school versus collegiate athletics) in concussion risk would facilitate more informed decision-making regarding sports participation and generate better targeted prevention strategies. Objectives The current study’s objectives were to: (1) determine the magnitude and hierarchy of sports-related concussion (SRC) risk across an array of events and (2) evaluate the modifying roles of sex, participation level, and session type on SRC rates. Methods A literature search was conducted on PubMed, searching concussion studies published between 2001 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria for studies required: (1) concussion occurred during sport, (2) that the SRC was clinically diagnosed, and (3) athlete exposures and concussions could be extracted or estimated. A study was excluded if it: (1) was not an original research article, (2) was not written in English language, (3) was an animal study, (4) did not have enough data to calculate SRC rates, (5) included professional or youth sample, and/or (6) contained data collected prior to 2001. The meta-analysis and meta-regression analyses were fit using a random effects model. Results Search results returned 2695 unique research articles, with 83 studies included in analyses. Sport, sex, participation level, and session type all significantly influenced SRC rates. Overall, rugby had the highest concussion rate and was classified as the highest risk sport (28.25 concussions per 10,000 athlete exposures). Overall, females had a higher concussion rate than males. Only lacrosse demonstrated a higher concussion rate for males compared to females. Collegiate athletes had higher concussion rates than high school athletes. Games were associated with 2.01 more concussions per 10,000 AEs than practices. Conclusions This meta-analysis demonstrated rugby has the highest concussion risk, followed by American Football, ice hockey, and wrestling. Concussion risk was influenced by sport, sex, participation, and session. Identifying the factors and environments that influence concussion risk can facilitate risk reduction and prevention strategies.

With an estimated 3.8 million sport- and recreation-related concussions occurring annually, targeted prevention and diagnostic methods are needed. Biomechanical analysis of head impacts may provide quantitative information that can inform both prevention and diagnostic strategies. To assess available head-impact devices and their clinical utility. We performed a systematic search of the electronic database PubMed for peer-reviewed publications, using the following phrases: accelerometer and concussion, head impact telemetry, head impacts and concussion and sensor, head impacts and sensor, impact sensor and concussion, linear acceleration and concussion, rotational acceleration and concussion, and xpatch concussion. In addition to the literature review, a Google search for head impact monitor and concussion monitor yielded 15 more devices. Included studies were performed in vivo, used commercially available devices, and focused on sport-related concussion. One author reviewed the title and abstract of each study for inclusion and exclusion criteria and then reviewed each full-text article to confirm inclusion criteria. Controversial articles were reviewed by all authors to reach consensus. In total, 61 peer-reviewed articles involving 4 head-impact devices were included. Participants in boxing, football, ice hockey, soccer, or snow sports ranged in age from 6 to 24 years; 18% (n = 11) of the studies included female athletes. The Head Impact Telemetry System was the most widely used device (n = 53). Fourteen additional commercially available devices were presented. Measurements collected by impact monitors provided real-time data to estimate player exposure but did not have the requisite sensitivity to concussion. Proper interpretation of previously reported head-impact kinematics across age, sport, and position may inform future research and enable staff clinicians working on the sidelines to monitor athletes. However, head-impact-monitoring systems have limited clinical utility due to error rates, designs, and low specificity in predicting concussive injury.

Sport-related concussions (SRCs) are known to have short-term effects on cognitive processes, which can result in diverse clinical presentations. The long-term effects of SRC and repeated exposure to head impacts that do not result in SRC on specific cognitive health outcomes remain unclear. To synthesize and appraise the evidence base regarding cognitive health in living retired athletes with a history of head-impact exposure or SRC. A systematic search of the EMBASE, PsycINFO, MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science databases was conducted from inception to April 2018 using common key words and medical subject headings related to 3 components: (1) the participant (eg, retired athlete), (2) the primary outcome measure (eg, cognitive test used), and (3) the secondary outcome measure (eg, history of sport concussion). Cross-sectional studies of living retired male or female athletes in which at least 1 cognitive test was used as an outcome measure were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies. Data extraction was performed using Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Methodologic quality was assessed independently by 2 reviewers using the Downs and Black tool. The search yielded 46 cross-sectional observational studies that were included in a qualitative synthesis. Most included studies (80%, n = 37) were published in the 5 years before our review. A large proportion of these studies (n = 20) included retired American National Football League players. The other research investigated professional, university, high school, and amateur retired athletes participating in sports such as American and Australian football, boxing, field and ice hockey, rugby, and soccer. The total sample consisted of 13 975 participants: 7387 collision-sport athletes, 662 contact-sport athletes, 3346 noncontact-sport athletes, and 2580 participants classified as controls. Compared with control participants or normative data, retired athletes displayed worse performance in 17 of 31 studies (55%) of memory, 6 of 11 studies (55%) of executive function, and 4 of 6 studies (67%) of psychomotor function and increased subjective concerns about cognitive function in 11 of 14 studies (79%). The authors of 13 of 46 investigations (28%) reported a frequency-response relationship, with poorer cognitive outcomes in athletes who had greater levels of exposure to head impacts or concussions. However, these results must be interpreted in light of the lack of methodologic rigor and moderate quality assessment of the included studies. Evidence of poorer cognitive health among retired athletes with a history of concussion and head-impact exposure is evolving. Our results suggest that a history of SRC may more greatly affect the cognitive domains of memory, executive function, and psychomotor function. Retired athletes appeared to have increased self-reported cognitive difficulties, but the paucity of high-quality, prospective studies limited the conclusions that could be drawn regarding a cause-and-effect relationship between concussion and long-term health outcomes. Future researchers should consider a range of cognitive health outcomes, as well as premorbid ability, in diverse samples of athletes with or without a history of concussion or head-impact exposure to delineate the long-term effects of sport participation on cognitive functioning.

This paper presents the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 5th Edition (SCAT5), which is the most recent revision of a sport concussion evaluation tool for use by healthcare professionals in the acute evaluation of suspected concussion. The revision of the SCAT3 (first published in 2013) culminated in the SCAT5. The revision was based on a systematic review and synthesis of current research, public input and expert panel review as part of the 5th International Consensus Conference on Concussion in Sport held in Berlin in 2016. The SCAT5 is intended for use in those who are 13 years of age or older. The Child SCAT5 is a tool for those aged 5–12 years, which is discussed elsewhere.

ObjectivesTo evaluate prevention strategies, their unintended consequences and modifiable risk factors for sport-related concussion (SRC) and/or head impact risk.DesignThis systematic review and meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42019152982) and conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.Data sourcesEight databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, Cochrane (Systematic Review and Controlled Trails Registry), SPORTDiscus, EMBASE, ERIC0 were searched in October 2019 and updated in March 2022, and references searched from any identified systematic review.Eligibility criteriaStudy inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) original data human research studies, (2) investigated SRC or head impacts, (3) evaluated an SRC prevention intervention, unintended consequence or modifiable risk factor, (4) participants competing in any sport, (5) analytic study design, (6) systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included to identify original data manuscripts in reference search and (7) peer-reviewed. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) review articles, pre-experimental, ecological, case series or case studies and (2) not written in English.ResultsIn total, 220 studies were eligible for inclusion and 192 studies were included in the results based on methodological criteria as assessed through the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network high (‘++’) or acceptable (‘+’) quality. Evidence was available examining protective gear (eg, helmets, headgear, mouthguards) (n=39), policy and rule changes (n=38), training strategies (n=34), SRC management strategies (n=12), unintended consequences (n=5) and modifiable risk factors (n=64). Meta-analyses demonstrated a protective effect of mouthguards in collision sports (incidence rate ratio, IRR 0.74; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.89). Policy disallowing bodychecking in child and adolescent ice hockey was associated with a 58% lower concussion rate compared with bodychecking leagues (IRR 0.42; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.53), and evidence supports no unintended injury consequences of policy disallowing bodychecking. In American football, strategies limiting contact in practices were associated with a 64% lower practice-related concussion rate (IRR 0.36; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.80). Some evidence also supports up to 60% lower concussion rates with implementation of a neuromuscular training warm-up programme in rugby. More research examining potentially modifiable risk factors (eg, neck strength, optimal tackle technique) are needed to inform concussion prevention strategies.ConclusionsPolicy and rule modifications, personal protective equipment, and neuromuscular training strategies may help to prevent SRC.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019152982.

To provide athletic trainers, physicians, and other health care professionals with best-practice guidelines for the management of sport-related concussions. An estimated 3.8 million concussions occur each year in the United States as a result of sport and physical activity. Athletic trainers are commonly the first medical providers available onsite to identify and evaluate these injuries. The recommendations for concussion management provided here are based on the most current research and divided into sections on education and prevention, documentation and legal aspects, evaluation and return to play, and other considerations.

Background The immediate post concussion assessment and cognitive testing (ImPACT) is the most widely used concussion assessment tool. Despite its popularity, it is unclear if validation studies for the ImPACT test covered all aspects of validity to support its widespread use in research and clinical practice. Objective The purpose of this report is to review literature surrounding the validity and the utility of the ImPACT test. Data sources and appraisal A systematic review of relevant studies in PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO was carried out. Studies were evaluated using the STROBE (strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology) or the STARD (standards for reporting of diagnostic accuracy) criteria. Results The literature search yielded 5968 studies. Sixty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative review. Although the convergent validity of ImPACT was supported, evidence of discriminant and predictive validity, diagnostic accuracy and responsiveness was inconclusive. The utility of the ImPACT test after acute symptom resolution was sparse. The review found many factors influenced the validity and utility of ImPACT scores. Conclusion Clinicians must consider the benefit of ImPACT testing for their patients on a case-by-case scenario and must take the psychometric properties of the test into account when interpreting results.

For over two decades, the Concussion in Sport Group has held meetings and developed five international statements on concussion in sport. This 6th statement summarises the processes and outcomes of the 6th International Conference on Concussion in Sport held in Amsterdam on 27–30 October 2022 and should be read in conjunction with the (1) methodology paper that outlines the consensus process in detail and (2) 10 systematic reviews that informed the conference outcomes. Over 3½ years, author groups conducted systematic reviews of predetermined priority topics relevant to concussion in sport. The format of the conference, expert panel meetings and workshops to revise or develop new clinical assessment tools, as described in the methodology paper, evolved from previous consensus meetings with several new components. Apart from this consensus statement, the conference process yielded revised tools including the Concussion Recognition Tool-6 (CRT6) and Sport Concussion Assessment Tool-6 (SCAT6, Child SCAT6), as well as a new tool, the Sport Concussion Office Assessment Tool-6 (SCOAT6, Child SCOAT6). This consensus process also integrated new features including a focus on the para athlete, the athlete’s perspective, concussion-specific medical ethics and matters related to both athlete retirement and the potential long-term effects of SRC, including neurodegenerative disease. This statement summarises evidence-informed principles of concussion prevention, assessment and management, and emphasises those areas requiring more research.

Concussion is a heterogeneous injury occurring throughout a range of impact magnitudes. Consequently, research focusing on a single or set of variables at the time of injury to understand concussive biomechanics has been thwarted by low injury prediction sensitivity. The current study examined the role of Impact Density in estimating concussive injury risk. Head impact data were collected across seven high school football seasons with the Head Impact Telemetry System (HIT System). Over the study period, 29 concussions were included for data analysis. The linear acceleration of the concussive impact was matched to a Control athlete, along with impacts in the 24 h before. Linear and rotational acceleration for the 19 impacts leading into the final event and the cumulative accelerations over time were evaluated. Analyses indicated no difference in impact counts within the final 24 h, or impact magnitudes for linear and rotational acceleration among the final 20 impacts (p > 0.05). A novel metric, Impact Density, was calculated from the final 20 impacts by summing the acceleration magnitude divided by time from the previous impact. Analyses indicated the Concussed athletes incurred a significantly higher linear (concussed: 255.4g/sec (standard error of the mean [SEM] = 40.1), controls:145.4g/sec (SEM = 23.8), p = 0.016), and rotational (Concussed:10311.3 rad/s/s/s (SEM = 1883.7), Controls: 6083.8 rad/s/s/s (SEM = 1115.9), p = 0.029) Impact Density than the Control athletes. Similar to other investigations, there was no difference in individual linear or rotational impact magnitude in the 20 impacts before and including the injury. The measure of Impact Density, however, revealed differences between the Concussed and Control athletes. These data suggest that the biomechanical threshold for concussion fluctuates downwardly with a greater impact magnitude and number with a return to pre-impact levels with time, suggesting physiological vulnerability to repeated head impacts. The current results highlight that time between impacts, not just impact magnitude, influences risk for concussion.

Correspondence to Dr Paul McCrory, The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, Heidelberg 3084, Victoria, Australia; paulmccrory@icloud.com Preamble The 2017 Concussion in Sport Group (CISG) consensus statement is designed to build on the principles outlined in the previous statements1–4 and to develop further conceptual understanding of sport-related concussion (SRC) using an expert consensus-based approach. First and foremost, this document is intended to guide clinical practice; however, the authors feel that it can also help form the agenda for future research relevant to SRC by identifying knowledge gaps. At present, there is no perfect diagnostic test or marker that clinicians can rely on for an immediate diagnosis of SRC in the sporting environment. Because of this evolving process, it is not possible to rule out SRC when an injury event occurs associated with a transient neurological symptom. [...]tests include the SCAT5, which incorporates the Maddocks' questions6 7 and the Standardised Assessment of Concussion (SAC).8–10 It is worth noting that standard orientation questions (eg, time, place, person) are unreliable in the sporting situation when compared with memory assessment.7 11 It is recognised, however, that abbreviated testing paradigms are designed for rapid SRC screening on the sidelines and are not meant to replace a comprehensive neurological evaluation; nor should they be used as a standalone tool for the ongoing management of SRC.