| Literature DB >> 30405511 |
Teena Shetty1, Joseph T Nguyen2, Taylor Cogsil1, Apostolos John Tsiouris3, Sumit N Niogi3, Esther U Kim1, Aashka Dalal4, Kristin Halvorsen1, Kelianne Cummings5, Tianhao Zhang6, Joseph C Masdeu7, Pratik Mukherjee8, Luca Marinelli9.
Abstract
Background: Uncertainty continues to surround mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) diagnosis, symptoms, prognosis, and outcome due in part to a lack of objective biomarkers of injury and recovery. As mTBI gains recognition as a serious public health epidemic, there is need to identify risk factors, diagnostic tools, and imaging biomarkers to help guide diagnosis and management.Entities:
Keywords: age; concussion; gender; imaging; mild traumatic brain injury; neuropsychological assessments; risk factors; white matter hyperintensities
Year: 2018 PMID: 30405511 PMCID: PMC6206843 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00836
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Subject and control demographics.
| 34 | 25.3 | 7.7 | 111 | 23.2 | 9.0 | 0.227 | |
| Age < 25 | 34 | 17 | 50% | 111 | 73 | 66% | 0.097 |
| Age 25+ | 34 | 17 | 50% | 111 | 38 | 34% | |
| Male | 34 | 18 | 53% | 110 | 62 | 56% | 0.726 |
| Female | 34 | 16 | 47% | 110 | 48 | 44% | |
| Less than HS | 34 | 9 | 26% | 110 | 52 | 47% | 0.071 |
| HS or GED Graduate | 34 | 1 | 3% | 110 | 7 | 6% | |
| Some college | 34 | 4 | 12% | 110 | 16 | 15% | |
| College degree (Bachelors or Associates) | 34 | 13 | 38% | 110 | 25 | 23% | |
| Graduate degree (e.g., Masters, MD, JD, PhD) | 34 | 7 | 21% | 110 | 10 | 9% | |
| Hispanic or Latino | 34 | 4 | 12% | 111 | 12 | 11% | 0.770 |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 34 | 27 | 79% | 111 | 97 | 87% | |
| Not Reported | 34 | 3 | 9% | 111 | 2 | 2% | |
| White | 34 | 18 | 53% | 111 | 80 | 72% | 0.887 |
| Non-white | 34 | 7 | 21% | 111 | 29 | 26% | |
| Not Reported | 34 | 9 | 26% | 111 | 2 | 2% | |
| Never smoked/used tobacco products | 34 | 31 | 91% | 109 | 98 | 90% | 0.828 |
| Current or former smoker/user tobacco products | 34 | 3 | 9% | 109 | 11 | 10% | |
| None (0) | 34 | 34 | 100% | 110 | 75 | 68% | 0.001 |
| 1 | 34 | 0 | 0% | 110 | 18 | 16% | |
| 2+ | 34 | 0 | 0% | 110 | 17 | 15% | |
| No | 34 | 34 | 100% | 111 | 106 | 95% | 0.591 |
| Yes | 34 | 0 | 0% | 111 | 5 | 5% | |
| Left | 34 | 4 | 12% | 110 | 13 | 12% | >0.999 |
| Right | 34 | 30 | 88% | 110 | 97 | 88% | |
Figure 1Longitudinal change in assessment scores stratified by (A) digit recall; (B) modified BESS; and (C) Immediate word recall. 5-Digit Backward Recall significant from E2 to E3 (50 to 69%, p = 0.009) and E2 to E4 (50 to 74%, p = 0.002). Double-Leg Stance, Single-Leg Stance, and Tandem-Leg stance of BESS all significant longitudinally (p = 0.003, p < 0.001, p = 0.028, respectively). Immediate 5 word recall statistically significant longitudinally (p = 0.007). *p ≥ 0.05.
Figure 2Longitudinal assessment of symptom severity score across encounters stratified by (A) sex; (B) age group; (C) number of previous mTBIs; (D) personal history of chronic headache or migraine and; (E) personal history of psychiatric disorder. Gender was significantly different at the E2 encounter (41.6 vs. 25.9, p < 0.001). Age was significantly different at E2 (46.0 vs. 28.0, p < 0.001), E3 (26.1 vs. 13.8, p < 0.001), and E4 (17.7 vs. 2.6, p = 0.003). Psychiatric history was significantly different at E2 (50.7 vs. 29.4, p < 0.001) and E3 (39.2 vs. 13.3, p < 0.001). *p ≥ 0.05.
Comparisons of outcomes over time between gender.
| Symptom Severity Score (0–132) | E 1 | 29.0 | 3.9 | 38.4 | 4.9 | 0.134 |
| E 2 | 25.9 | 2.8 | 41.6 | 3.2 | <0.001 | |
| E 3 | 15.4 | 3.1 | 18.8 | 3.4 | 0.473 | |
| E 4 | 5.0 | 3.8 | 10.7 | 4.0 | 0.303 | |
| <0.001 | <0.001 | |||||
| 3-Digit Recall (% correct) | E 1 | 97% | 3% | 94% | 5% | 0.741 |
| E 2 | 98% | 2% | 95% | 3% | 0.425 | |
| E 3 | 100% | 0% | 97% | 3% | 0.311 | |
| E 4 | 97% | 3% | 96% | 4% | 0.960 | |
| 0.360 | 0.944 | |||||
| 4-Digit Recall (% correct) | E 1 | 90% | 6% | 89% | 7% | 0.934 |
| E 2 | 93% | 3% | 83% | 6% | 0.155 | |
| E 3 | 96% | 3% | 87% | 5% | 0.166 | |
| E 4 | 93% | 5% | 93% | 5% | 0.943 | |
| 0.713 | 0.630 | |||||
| 5-Digit Recall (% correct) | E 1 | 62% | 9% | 61% | 11% | 0.948 |
| E 2 | 48% | 7% | 51% | 8% | 0.770 | |
| E 3 | 73% | 7% | 66% | 8% | 0.497 | |
| E 4 | 70% | 8% | 78% | 8% | 0.502 | |
| 0.005 | 0.100 | |||||
| 6-Digit Recall (% correct) | E 1 | 55% | 9% | 50% | 12% | 0.730 |
| E 2 | 53% | 7% | 41% | 8% | 0.270 | |
| E 3 | 59% | 7% | 53% | 8% | 0.556 | |
| E 4 | 60% | 9% | 52% | 10% | 0.535 | |
| 0.813 | 0.681 | |||||
| Immediate Memory Word Recall (1–15) | E 1 | 14.1 | 0.2 | 14.3 | 0.2 | 0.385 |
| E 2 | 14.4 | 0.1 | 14.4 | 0.2 | 0.730 | |
| E 3 | 14.7 | 0.2 | 14.6 | 0.2 | 0.706 | |
| E 4 | 14.5 | 0.2 | 14.9 | 0.2 | 0.177 | |
| 0.050 | 0.117 | |||||
| Total mBESS Score (0–30) | E 1 | 24.5 | 0.7 | 23.7 | 0.9 | 0.451 |
| E 2 | 25.8 | 0.5 | 26.5 | 0.6 | 0.392 | |
| E 3 | 26.5 | 0.5 | 27.1 | 0.6 | 0.436 | |
| E 4 | 27.4 | 0.7 | 28.0 | 0.7 | 0.527 | |
| 0.014 | 0.001 | |||||
| Double-Leg Stance (number of errors) | E 1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 0.1 | <0.001 |
| E 2 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.734 | |
| E 3 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.637 | |
| E 4 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | >0.999 | |
| 0.978 | <0.001 | |||||
| Single-Leg Stance (number of errors) | E 1 | 4.0 | 0.4 | 3.9 | 0.5 | 0.936 |
| E 2 | 3.0 | 0.3 | 2.8 | 0.4 | 0.684 | |
| E 3 | 1.9 | 0.3 | 1.9 | 0.4 | 0.874 | |
| E 4 | 1.8 | 0.4 | 1.4 | 0.4 | 0.467 | |
| <0.001 | 0.001 | |||||
| Tandem Stance (number of errors) | E 1 | 1.48 | 0.27 | 1.56 | 0.35 | 0.870 |
| E 2 | 1.15 | 0.20 | 0.83 | 0.23 | 0.303 | |
| E 3 | 0.89 | 0.22 | 0.92 | 0.24 | 0.916 | |
| E 4 | 0.77 | 0.27 | 0.68 | 0.28 | 0.821 | |
| 0.227 | 0.240 | |||||
B, indicates adjusted p-value between males and females; W, indicates overall p-value within males and females.