Concussion symptom inventory: an empirically derived scale for monitoring resolution of symptoms following sport-related concussion.

Department of Neurology, Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, Maywood, IL 60611, USA.
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology (Impact Factor: 2). 07/2009; 24(3):219-29.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Self-report post-concussion symptom scales have been a key method for monitoring recovery from sport-related concussion, to assist in medical management, and return-to-play decision-making. To date, however, item selection and scaling metrics for these instruments have been based solely upon clinical judgment, and no one scale has been identified as the "gold standard". We analyzed a large set of data from existing scales obtained from three separate case-control studies in order to derive a sensitive and efficient scale for this application by eliminating items that were found to be insensitive to concussion. Baseline data from symptom checklists including a total of 27 symptom variables were collected from a total of 16,350 high school and college athletes. Follow-up data were obtained from 641 athletes who subsequently incurred a concussion. Symptom checklists were administered at baseline (preseason), immediately post-concussion, post-game, and at 1, 3, and 5 days post-injury. Effect-size analyses resulted in the retention of only 12 of the 27 variables. Receiver-operating characteristic analyses were used to confirm that the reduction in items did not reduce sensitivity or specificity. The newly derived Concussion Symptom Inventory is presented and recommended as a research and clinical tool for monitoring recovery from sport-related concussion.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background There is an urgent need for objective criteria adjunctive to standard clinical assessment of acute Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). Details of the development of a quantitative index to identify structural brain injury based on brain electrical activity will be described. Methods Acute closed head injured and normal patients (n=1470) were recruited from 16 US Emergency Departments and evaluated using brain electrical activity (EEG) recorded from forehead electrodes. Patients had high GSC (median=15), and most presented with low suspicion of brain injury. Patients were divided into a CT positive (CT+) group and a group with CT negative findings or where CT scans were not ordered according to standard assessment (CT-/CT_NR). Three different classifier methodologies, Ensemble Harmony, Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO), and Genetic Algorithm (GA), were utilized. Results Similar performance accuracy was obtained for all three methodologies with an average sensitivity/specificity of 97.5%/59.5%, area under the curves (AUC) of 0.90 and average Negative Predictive Validity (NPV) >99%. Sensitivity was highest for CT+ cases with potentially life threatening hematomas, where two of three classifiers were 100%. Conclusion Similar performance of these classifiers suggests that the optimal separation of the populations was obtained given the overlap of the underlying distributions of features of brain activity. High sensitivity to CT+ injuries (highest in hematomas) and specificity significantly higher than that obtained using ED guidelines for imaging, supports the enhanced clinical utility of this technology and suggests the potential role in the objective, rapid and more optimal triage of TBI patients.
    Computers in Biology and Medicine 08/2014; · 1.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to validate a recently proposed return-to-play (RTP) decision model that simplifies the complex process into three underlying constructs: injury type and severity, sport injury risk, and factors unrelated to injury risk (decision modifiers). We used a cross-over design and provided clinical vignettes to clinicians involved in RTP decision making through an online survey. Each vignette included examples changing injury severity, sport risk (e.g. different positions), and non-injury risk factors (e.g. financial considerations). As the three-step model suggests, clinicians increased restrictions as injury severity increased, and also changed RTP decisions when factors related to sport risk and factors unrelated to sport risk were changed. The effect was different for different injury severities and clinical cases, suggesting context dependency. The model was also consistent with recommendations made by subgroups of clinicians: sport medicine physicians, non-sport medicine physicians, and allied health care workers.
    Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports 09/2014; · 3.21 Impact Factor


Available from
May 29, 2014