CONTEXT: Reaction time is typically impaired after concussion. A clinical test of reaction time (RT(clin)) that does not require a computer to administer may be a valuable tool to assist in concussion diagnosis and management. OBJECTIVE: To determine the test-retest reliability of RTclinmeasured over successive seasons in competitive collegiate athletes and to compare these results with a computerized measure of reaction time (RT(comp)). DESIGN: Case series with repeated measures. SETTING: Preparticipation physical examinations for the football, women's soccer, and wrestling teams at a single university. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: 102 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I athletes. INTERVENTION(S): The RT(clin) was measured using a measuring stick embedded in a weighted rubber disk that was released and caught as quickly as possible. The RT(comp) was measured using the simple reaction time component of CogState Sport. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Data were collected at 2 time points, 1 season apart, during preparticipation physical examinations. Outcomes were mean simple RT(clin) and RT(comp). RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient estimates from season 1 to season 2 were 0.645 for RT(clin) (n = 102, entire sample) and 0.512 for RT(comp) (n = 62 athletes who had 2 consecutive valid baseline CogState Sport test sessions). CONCLUSIONS: The test-retest reliability of RT(clin) over consecutive seasons compared favorably with that of a concurrently tested computerized measure of reaction time and with literature-based estimates of computerized reaction time measures. This finding supports the potential use of RT(clin) as part of a multifaceted concussion assessment battery. Further prospective study is warranted.
CONTEXT: Reaction time is typically impaired after concussion. A clinical test of reaction time (RT(clin)) that does not require a computer to administer may be a valuable tool to assist in concussion diagnosis and management. OBJECTIVE: To determine the test-retest reliability of RTclinmeasured over successive seasons in competitive collegiate athletes and to compare these results with a computerized measure of reaction time (RT(comp)). DESIGN: Case series with repeated measures. SETTING: Preparticipation physical examinations for the football, women's soccer, and wrestling teams at a single university. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: 102 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I athletes. INTERVENTION(S): The RT(clin) was measured using a measuring stick embedded in a weighted rubber disk that was released and caught as quickly as possible. The RT(comp) was measured using the simple reaction time component of CogState Sport. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Data were collected at 2 time points, 1 season apart, during preparticipation physical examinations. Outcomes were mean simple RT(clin) and RT(comp). RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient estimates from season 1 to season 2 were 0.645 for RT(clin) (n = 102, entire sample) and 0.512 for RT(comp) (n = 62 athletes who had 2 consecutive valid baseline CogState Sport test sessions). CONCLUSIONS: The test-retest reliability of RT(clin) over consecutive seasons compared favorably with that of a concurrently tested computerized measure of reaction time and with literature-based estimates of computerized reaction time measures. This finding supports the potential use of RT(clin) as part of a multifaceted concussion assessment battery. Further prospective study is warranted.
Authors: Kevin M Guskiewicz; Scott L Bruce; Robert C Cantu; Michael S Ferrara; James P Kelly; Michael McCrea; Margot Putukian; Tamara C Valovich McLeod Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Steven P Broglio; Michael S Ferrara; Stephen N Macciocchi; Ted A Baumgartner; Ronald Elliott Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2007 Oct-Dec Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Jaclyn B Caccese; James T Eckner; Lea Franco-MacKendrick; Joseph B Hazzard; Meng Ni; Steven P Broglio; Thomas W McAllister; Michael McCrea; Thomas A Buckley Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Paul McCrory; Willem H Meeuwisse; Mark Aubry; Robert C Cantu; Jiři Dvořák; Ruben J Echemendia; Lars Engebretsen; Karen Johnston; Jeffrey S Kutcher; Martin Raftery; Allen Sills; Brian W Benson; Gavin A Davis; Richard Ellenbogen; Kevin M Guskiewicz; Stanley A Herring; Grant L Iverson; Barry D Jordan; James Kissick; Michael McCrea; Andrew S McIntosh; David Maddocks; Michael Makdissi; Laura Purcell; Margot Putukian; Kathryn Schneider; Charles H Tator; Michael Turner Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2013 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Lindsay D Nelson; Ashley A LaRoche; Adam Y Pfaller; E Brooke Lerner; Thomas A Hammeke; Christopher Randolph; William B Barr; Kevin Guskiewicz; Michael A McCrea Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Adam J Wells; Jay R Hoffman; Kyle S Beyer; Adam R Jajtner; Adam M Gonzalez; Jeremy R Townsend; Gerald T Mangine; Edward H Robinson; William P McCormack; Maren S Fragala; Jeffrey R Stout Journal: J Sports Sci Med Date: 2014-01-20 Impact factor: 2.988