False-Positive Rates, Risk Factors, and Interpretations of the Vestibular/Ocular Motor Screening in Collegiate Athletes.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES
Daniel Rosenblum, Catherine Donahue, Haven Higgins, Madison Brna, Jacob Resch
{"title":"False-Positive Rates, Risk Factors, and Interpretations of the Vestibular/Ocular Motor Screening in Collegiate Athletes.","authors":"Daniel Rosenblum, Catherine Donahue, Haven Higgins, Madison Brna, Jacob Resch","doi":"10.4085/1062-6050-0317.23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Biological sex and history of motion sickness are known modifiers associated with a false-positive baseline Vestibular/Ocular Motor Screening (VOMS). However, other factors may be associated with a false-positive VOMS in collegiate athletes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify contributing factors to false-positive VOMS assessments using population-specific criteria. We also critically appraised previously reported interpretation criteria.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Descriptive laboratory study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Single-site collegiate athletic training clinic.</p><p><strong>Patients or other participants: </strong>National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I athletes (n = 462 [41% female]) aged 18.8 ± 1.4 years.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measure(s): </strong>Participants completed the Athlete Sleep Behavior Questionnaire, the 7-Item Generalized Anxiety Index, the Immediate Postconcussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing battery, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, the Revised Head Injury Scale, the Sensory Organization Test, and the VOMS as part of a multidimensional baseline concussion assessment. Participants were classified into 2 groups based on whether they had a total symptom score of greater than or equal to 8 after VOMS administration, excluding the baseline checklist. We used χ2 and independent t tests to compare group demographics. A binary logistic regression with adjusted odds ratios (ORs) was used to evaluate the influence of sex, corrected vision, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, Immediate Postconcussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing composite scores, concussion history, history of treatment for headache and/or migraine, Generalized Anxiety Index scores, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores, Athlete Sleep Behavior Questionnaire scores, and Sensory Organization Test equilibrium scores and somatosensory, visual, and vestibular sensory ratios on false-positive rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Approximately 9.1% (42 of 462 [30 females]) met criteria for a false-positive VOMS. A significantly greater proportion of females had false positives (χ21 = 18.37, P < .001). Female sex (OR = 2.79; 95% CI = 1.17, 6.65; P = .02) and history of treatment for headache (OR = 4.99; 95% CI = 1.21, 20.59; P = .026) were the only significant predictors of false-positive VOMS. Depending on cutoff interpretation, false-positive rates using our data ranged from 9.1% to 22.5%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results support the most recent interpretation guidelines for the VOMS in collegiate athletes due to a low false-positive rate and ease of interpretation. Biological sex and history of headaches should be considered when administering the VOMS in the absence of a baseline.</p>","PeriodicalId":54875,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Athletic Training","volume":" ","pages":"600-607"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11220773/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Athletic Training","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-0317.23","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: Biological sex and history of motion sickness are known modifiers associated with a false-positive baseline Vestibular/Ocular Motor Screening (VOMS). However, other factors may be associated with a false-positive VOMS in collegiate athletes.

Objective: To identify contributing factors to false-positive VOMS assessments using population-specific criteria. We also critically appraised previously reported interpretation criteria.

Design: Descriptive laboratory study.

Setting: Single-site collegiate athletic training clinic.

Patients or other participants: National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I athletes (n = 462 [41% female]) aged 18.8 ± 1.4 years.

Main outcome measure(s): Participants completed the Athlete Sleep Behavior Questionnaire, the 7-Item Generalized Anxiety Index, the Immediate Postconcussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing battery, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, the Revised Head Injury Scale, the Sensory Organization Test, and the VOMS as part of a multidimensional baseline concussion assessment. Participants were classified into 2 groups based on whether they had a total symptom score of greater than or equal to 8 after VOMS administration, excluding the baseline checklist. We used χ2 and independent t tests to compare group demographics. A binary logistic regression with adjusted odds ratios (ORs) was used to evaluate the influence of sex, corrected vision, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, Immediate Postconcussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing composite scores, concussion history, history of treatment for headache and/or migraine, Generalized Anxiety Index scores, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores, Athlete Sleep Behavior Questionnaire scores, and Sensory Organization Test equilibrium scores and somatosensory, visual, and vestibular sensory ratios on false-positive rates.

Results: Approximately 9.1% (42 of 462 [30 females]) met criteria for a false-positive VOMS. A significantly greater proportion of females had false positives (χ21 = 18.37, P < .001). Female sex (OR = 2.79; 95% CI = 1.17, 6.65; P = .02) and history of treatment for headache (OR = 4.99; 95% CI = 1.21, 20.59; P = .026) were the only significant predictors of false-positive VOMS. Depending on cutoff interpretation, false-positive rates using our data ranged from 9.1% to 22.5%.

Conclusions: Our results support the most recent interpretation guidelines for the VOMS in collegiate athletes due to a low false-positive rate and ease of interpretation. Biological sex and history of headaches should be considered when administering the VOMS in the absence of a baseline.

大学运动员前庭眼运动筛查的假阳性率、危险因素和解释。
背景:生物性别和晕动病史是已知的与前庭眼运动筛查(VOMS)假阳性基线相关的修饰因素。然而,其他因素可能与大学运动员的VOMS假阳性有关。目的:利用特定人群标准确定VOMS假阳性评估的影响因素。我们还批判性地评价了先前报道的解释标准。设计:描述性实验室。设置:单间高校运动训练诊所。患者或其他参与者:NCAA一级运动员(n=462名[41%为女性]),年龄18.8±1.4岁。主要结果测量:作为多维基线脑震荡评估的一部分,参与者完成了运动员睡眠行为问卷(ASBQ)、广泛性焦虑指数(GAD-7)、冲击测试、患者健康问卷(PHQ-9)、修订头部损伤量表(HIS-r)、感觉组织测试(SOT)和VOMS。根据服用VOMS后的总症状评分是否≥8分(不包括基线检查表),将参与者分为两组。卡方检验(χ2)和独立t检验比较各组人口统计学特征。采用校正优势比(OR)的二元logistic回归评估性别、矫正视力、ADHD、冲击综合评分、脑震荡史、头痛和/或偏头痛治疗史、GAD-7、PHQ-9、ASBQ和SOT平衡评分以及体感、视觉和前庭感觉比值对假阳性的影响。结果:约9.1%(42/462[30名女性])符合VOMS假阳性标准。女性假阳性比例显著高于女性(χ2(1) = 18.37, p < 0.001)。女性(OR=2.79, 95% CI [1.17-6.65], p=0.02)和头痛治疗史(OR=4.99, 95% CI [1.21-20.59], p=0.026)是VOMS假阳性的唯一显著预测因素。根据截断解释,使用我们数据的假阳性率范围为9.1%-22.5%。结论:我们的研究结果支持最新的大学运动员VOMS的解释指南,因为它的假阳性率低,易于解释。在没有基线的情况下,使用VOMS时应考虑生理性别和头痛史。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Athletic Training
Journal of Athletic Training 医学-运动科学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
6.10%
发文量
106
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The mission of the Journal of Athletic Training is to enhance communication among professionals interested in the quality of health care for the physically active through education and research in prevention, evaluation, management and rehabilitation of injuries. The Journal of Athletic Training offers research you can use in daily practice. It keeps you abreast of scientific advancements that ultimately define professional standards of care - something you can''t be without if you''re responsible for the well-being of patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信