CONTEXT: Athletic trainers (ATs) are often the first health care providers to conduct concussion assessments and carry out postinjury management. Best practices for concussion evaluation and management have changed rapidly in recent years, outdating previous reports of ATs' concussion practices. OBJECTIVE: To examine ATs' current concussion-assessment and -management techniques. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Web-based survey. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: A random convenience sample of 8777 ATs (response rate = 15.0% [n = 1307]; years certified = 15.0 ± 10.6) from the National Athletic Trainers' Association membership. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Survey Web links were e-mailed to prospective participants, with 2 follow-up e-mails sent by the National Athletic Trainers' Association. The survey collected demographic information, the number of concussions assessed, the concussion-recovery patterns, and the assessment and return-to-participation (RTP) decision-making methods used. RESULTS: The ATs reported assessing a median of 12.0 (range = 0-218) concussions per year. A total of 95.3% (953/1000) ATs cited clinical examination as the most frequently used concussion-assessment tool, followed by symptom assessment (86.7%; 867/1000). A total of 52.7% (527/1000) ATs described a 3-domain minimum multidimensional concussion-assessment battery. Published RTP guidelines were the most common RTP decision-making tool (91.0%; 864/949), followed by clinical examination (88.2%; 837/949). The ATs with master's degrees were 1.36 times (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02, 1.81) more likely to use a 3-domain concussion-assessment battery than ATs with only bachelor's degrees (χ2 = 4.44, P = .05). Collegiate ATs were 2.12 (95% CI = 1.59, 2.84) and 1.63 (95% CI = 1.03, 2.59) times more likely to use a 3-domain concussion-assessment battery than high school and clinic-based ATs, respectively (χ2 = 26.29, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Athletic trainers were using the clinical examination, standardized assessment tools, and a 3-domain concussion-assessment-battery approach more frequently in clinical practice than previously reported. However, despite practice improvements, nearly half of ATs were not using a 3-domain minimum concussion-assessment battery. Clinicians should strive to implement multidimensional concussion assessments in their practices to ensure optimal diagnosis and management.
CONTEXT: Athletic trainers (ATs) are often the first health care providers to conduct concussion assessments and carry out postinjury management. Best practices for concussion evaluation and management have changed rapidly in recent years, outdating previous reports of ATs' concussion practices. OBJECTIVE: To examine ATs' current concussion-assessment and -management techniques. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Web-based survey. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: A random convenience sample of 8777 ATs (response rate = 15.0% [n = 1307]; years certified = 15.0 ± 10.6) from the National Athletic Trainers' Association membership. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Survey Web links were e-mailed to prospective participants, with 2 follow-up e-mails sent by the National Athletic Trainers' Association. The survey collected demographic information, the number of concussions assessed, the concussion-recovery patterns, and the assessment and return-to-participation (RTP) decision-making methods used. RESULTS: The ATs reported assessing a median of 12.0 (range = 0-218) concussions per year. A total of 95.3% (953/1000) ATs cited clinical examination as the most frequently used concussion-assessment tool, followed by symptom assessment (86.7%; 867/1000). A total of 52.7% (527/1000) ATs described a 3-domain minimum multidimensional concussion-assessment battery. Published RTP guidelines were the most common RTP decision-making tool (91.0%; 864/949), followed by clinical examination (88.2%; 837/949). The ATs with master's degrees were 1.36 times (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02, 1.81) more likely to use a 3-domain concussion-assessment battery than ATs with only bachelor's degrees (χ2 = 4.44, P = .05). Collegiate ATs were 2.12 (95% CI = 1.59, 2.84) and 1.63 (95% CI = 1.03, 2.59) times more likely to use a 3-domain concussion-assessment battery than high school and clinic-based ATs, respectively (χ2 = 26.29, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Athletic trainers were using the clinical examination, standardized assessment tools, and a 3-domain concussion-assessment-battery approach more frequently in clinical practice than previously reported. However, despite practice improvements, nearly half of ATs were not using a 3-domain minimum concussion-assessment battery. Clinicians should strive to implement multidimensional concussion assessments in their practices to ensure optimal diagnosis and management.
Entities:
Keywords:
diagnosis; evaluation; mild traumatic brain injury; sports medicine
Authors: M Aubry; R Cantu; J Dvorak; T Graf-Baumann; K Johnston; J Kelly; M Lovell; P McCrory; W Meeuwisse; P Schamasch Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: P McCrory; K Johnston; W Meeuwisse; M Aubry; R Cantu; J Dvorak; T Graf-Baumann; J Kelly; M Lovell; P Schamasch Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Paul McCrory; Willem Meeuwisse; Jiří Dvořák; Mark Aubry; Julian Bailes; Steven Broglio; Robert C Cantu; David Cassidy; Ruben J Echemendia; Rudy J Castellani; Gavin A Davis; Richard Ellenbogen; Carolyn Emery; Lars Engebretsen; Nina Feddermann-Demont; Christopher C Giza; Kevin M Guskiewicz; Stanley Herring; Grant L Iverson; Karen M Johnston; James Kissick; Jeffrey Kutcher; John J Leddy; David Maddocks; Michael Makdissi; Geoff T Manley; Michael McCrea; William P Meehan; Shinji Nagahiro; Jon Patricios; Margot Putukian; Kathryn J Schneider; Allen Sills; Charles H Tator; Michael Turner; Pieter E Vos Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2017-04-26 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Paul McCrory; Willem H Meeuwisse; Mark Aubry; Bob Cantu; Jirí Dvorák; Ruben J Echemendia; Lars Engebretsen; Karen Johnston; Jeffrey S Kutcher; Martin Raftery; Allen Sills; Brian W Benson; Gavin A Davis; Richard G Ellenbogen; Kevin 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: Br J Sports Med Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Jason P Mihalik; Robert C Lynall; Erin B Wasserman; Kevin M Guskiewicz; Stephen W Marshall Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Carolina P Quintana; Tamara C Valovich McLeod; Anne D Olson; Nicholas R Heebner; Matthew C Hoch Journal: Sports Med Date: 2021-01-05 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Lauren L Czerniak; Spencer W Liebel; Gian-Gabriel P Garcia; Mariel S Lavieri; Michael A McCrea; Thomas W McAllister; Steven P Broglio Journal: Sports Med Date: 2020-12-14 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Divya Jain; Kristy B Arbogast; Catherine C McDonald; Olivia E Podolak; Susan S Margulies; Kristina B Metzger; David R Howell; Mitchell M Scheiman; Christina L Master Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2022-07-14 Impact factor: 2.106
Authors: Jaclyn B Caccese; James T Eckner; Lea Franco-MacKendrick; Joseph B Hazzard; Meng Ni; Steven P Broglio; Thomas W McAllister; Michael A McCrea; Paul F Pasquina; Thomas A Buckley Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 3.824
Authors: David R Howell; Corrine N Seehusen; Mathew J Wingerson; Julie C Wilson; Robert C Lynall; Vipul Lugade Journal: J Appl Biomech Date: 2021-07-13 Impact factor: 1.606
Authors: David R Howell; Danielle L Hunt; Stacey E Aaron; William P Meehan; Can Ozan Tan Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2021-04-15 Impact factor: 7.010