Cargando…

Test-Retest Reliability and Interpretation of Common Concussion Assessment Tools: Findings from the NCAA-DoD CARE Consortium

BACKGROUND: Concussion diagnosis is typically made through clinical examination and supported by performance on clinical assessment tools. Performance on commonly implemented and emerging assessment tools is known to vary between administrations, in the absence of concussion. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Broglio, Steven P., Katz, Barry P., Zhao, Shi, McCrea, Michael, McAllister, Thomas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5889766/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29138991
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0813-0
_version_ 1783312746961436672
author Broglio, Steven P.
Katz, Barry P.
Zhao, Shi
McCrea, Michael
McAllister, Thomas
author_facet Broglio, Steven P.
Katz, Barry P.
Zhao, Shi
McCrea, Michael
McAllister, Thomas
author_sort Broglio, Steven P.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Concussion diagnosis is typically made through clinical examination and supported by performance on clinical assessment tools. Performance on commonly implemented and emerging assessment tools is known to vary between administrations, in the absence of concussion. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the test-retest reliability of commonly implemented and emerging concussion assessment tools across a large nationally representative sample of student-athletes. METHODS: Participants (n = 4874) from the Concussion Assessment, Research, and Education Consortium completed annual baseline assessments on two or three occasions. Each assessment included measures of self-reported concussion symptoms, motor control, brief and extended neurocognitive function, reaction time, oculomotor/oculovestibular function, and quality of life. Consistency between years 1 and 2 and 1 and 3 were estimated using intraclass correlation coefficients or Kappa and effect sizes (Cohen’s d). Clinical interpretation guidelines were also generated using confidence intervals to account for non-normally distributed data. RESULTS: Reliability for the self-reported concussion symptoms, motor control, and brief and extended neurocognitive assessments from year 1 to 2 ranged from 0.30 to 0.72 while effect sizes ranged from 0.01 to 0.28 (i.e., small). The reliability for these same measures ranged from 0.34 to 0.66 for the year 1–3 interval with effect sizes ranging from 0.05 to 0.42 (i.e., small to less than medium). The year 1–2 reliability for the reaction time, oculomotor/oculovestibular function, and quality-of-life measures ranged from 0.28 to 0.74 with effect sizes from 0.01 to 0.38 (i.e., small to less than medium effects). CONCLUSIONS: This investigation noted less than optimal reliability for most common and emerging concussion assessment tools. Despite this finding, their use is still necessitated by the absence of a gold standard diagnostic measure, with the ultimate goal of developing more refined and sound tools for clinical use. Clinical interpretation guidelines are provided for the clinician to apply with a degree of certainty in application. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40279-017-0813-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5889766
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58897662018-04-12 Test-Retest Reliability and Interpretation of Common Concussion Assessment Tools: Findings from the NCAA-DoD CARE Consortium Broglio, Steven P. Katz, Barry P. Zhao, Shi McCrea, Michael McAllister, Thomas Sports Med Original Research Article BACKGROUND: Concussion diagnosis is typically made through clinical examination and supported by performance on clinical assessment tools. Performance on commonly implemented and emerging assessment tools is known to vary between administrations, in the absence of concussion. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the test-retest reliability of commonly implemented and emerging concussion assessment tools across a large nationally representative sample of student-athletes. METHODS: Participants (n = 4874) from the Concussion Assessment, Research, and Education Consortium completed annual baseline assessments on two or three occasions. Each assessment included measures of self-reported concussion symptoms, motor control, brief and extended neurocognitive function, reaction time, oculomotor/oculovestibular function, and quality of life. Consistency between years 1 and 2 and 1 and 3 were estimated using intraclass correlation coefficients or Kappa and effect sizes (Cohen’s d). Clinical interpretation guidelines were also generated using confidence intervals to account for non-normally distributed data. RESULTS: Reliability for the self-reported concussion symptoms, motor control, and brief and extended neurocognitive assessments from year 1 to 2 ranged from 0.30 to 0.72 while effect sizes ranged from 0.01 to 0.28 (i.e., small). The reliability for these same measures ranged from 0.34 to 0.66 for the year 1–3 interval with effect sizes ranging from 0.05 to 0.42 (i.e., small to less than medium). The year 1–2 reliability for the reaction time, oculomotor/oculovestibular function, and quality-of-life measures ranged from 0.28 to 0.74 with effect sizes from 0.01 to 0.38 (i.e., small to less than medium effects). CONCLUSIONS: This investigation noted less than optimal reliability for most common and emerging concussion assessment tools. Despite this finding, their use is still necessitated by the absence of a gold standard diagnostic measure, with the ultimate goal of developing more refined and sound tools for clinical use. Clinical interpretation guidelines are provided for the clinician to apply with a degree of certainty in application. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40279-017-0813-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2017-11-14 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5889766/ /pubmed/29138991 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0813-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2018, corrected publication March 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Broglio, Steven P.
Katz, Barry P.
Zhao, Shi
McCrea, Michael
McAllister, Thomas
Test-Retest Reliability and Interpretation of Common Concussion Assessment Tools: Findings from the NCAA-DoD CARE Consortium
title Test-Retest Reliability and Interpretation of Common Concussion Assessment Tools: Findings from the NCAA-DoD CARE Consortium
title_full Test-Retest Reliability and Interpretation of Common Concussion Assessment Tools: Findings from the NCAA-DoD CARE Consortium
title_fullStr Test-Retest Reliability and Interpretation of Common Concussion Assessment Tools: Findings from the NCAA-DoD CARE Consortium
title_full_unstemmed Test-Retest Reliability and Interpretation of Common Concussion Assessment Tools: Findings from the NCAA-DoD CARE Consortium
title_short Test-Retest Reliability and Interpretation of Common Concussion Assessment Tools: Findings from the NCAA-DoD CARE Consortium
title_sort test-retest reliability and interpretation of common concussion assessment tools: findings from the ncaa-dod care consortium
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5889766/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29138991
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0813-0
work_keys_str_mv AT brogliostevenp testretestreliabilityandinterpretationofcommonconcussionassessmenttoolsfindingsfromthencaadodcareconsortium
AT katzbarryp testretestreliabilityandinterpretationofcommonconcussionassessmenttoolsfindingsfromthencaadodcareconsortium
AT zhaoshi testretestreliabilityandinterpretationofcommonconcussionassessmenttoolsfindingsfromthencaadodcareconsortium
AT mccreamichael testretestreliabilityandinterpretationofcommonconcussionassessmenttoolsfindingsfromthencaadodcareconsortium
AT mcallisterthomas testretestreliabilityandinterpretationofcommonconcussionassessmenttoolsfindingsfromthencaadodcareconsortium
AT testretestreliabilityandinterpretationofcommonconcussionassessmenttoolsfindingsfromthencaadodcareconsortium