A - 04 The Impact of Season Progression on Concussion Recovery In all Star Cheerleaders

IF 2.1 4区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY

Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology Pub Date : 2024-07-06 DOI:10.1093/arclin/acae052.04

S. Boucher, A. Datoc, A. S. Mathew, D. M. Choi, N. Sisneros, C. A. Jones, C. Ellis, J. P. Abt, S. Burkhart

{"title":"A - 04 The Impact of Season Progression on Concussion Recovery In all Star Cheerleaders","authors":"S. Boucher, A. Datoc, A. S. Mathew, D. M. Choi, N. Sisneros, C. A. Jones, C. Ellis, J. P. Abt, S. Burkhart","doi":"10.1093/arclin/acae052.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Little has been done to investigate the impact of cheerleading season progression on recovery trajectories of sports-related concussions (SRC). The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of season progression on concussion recovery in All Star cheerleaders.\n \n \n \n Female All Star cheerleaders (n = 52) aged 8–18 (13.9.0¬ ± 2.5 years) were evaluated in a specialty concussion clinic for SRC during the 2020–2023 seasons. Cheerleaders were sorted into groups based on when their injury occurred (T1 = tryout/practice portion of season, T2 = beginning of competition season, T3 = end of season/coveted competitions). Mann–Whitney U Tests were used to evaluate differences between groups.\n \n \n \n Most All Star cheerleaders were evaluated for SRC during T2 (n = 32) compared to T1 (n = 12) and T3 (n = 8). Cheerleaders injured during T2 reported significantly lower PCSS scores (M = 21.0, IQR = 15.0–37.0) compared to T1 (M = 52.5, IQR = 27.5–60.8) and T3 (M = 46.9, IQR = 34.0–90.0), p = 0.01. There were no significant differences in days since injury (DSI; T1 M = 5.67, SD = 7.84; T2 M = 6.13, SD = 8.64; T3 M = 3.50, SD = 2.67) and evaluation of overall recovery time across groups (T1 M = 20.92, SD = 10.19; T2 M = 24.25, SD = 17.85; T3 M = 16.38, SD = 13.89; p > 0.05).\n \n \n \n Overall, cheerleaders injured during the beginning of competition season had the lowest PCSS scores upon evaluation, which may be due to presenting to clinic further from their injury. Though not significant, All Star cheerleaders were evaluated sooner during the coveted competitions portion of the season. Despite the small sample size, the pattern of results suggests that greater incentive and pressure to participate in coveted competitions may lead to quicker recovery times.\n","PeriodicalId":8176,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acae052.04","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Little has been done to investigate the impact of cheerleading season progression on recovery trajectories of sports-related concussions (SRC). The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of season progression on concussion recovery in All Star cheerleaders. Female All Star cheerleaders (n = 52) aged 8–18 (13.9.0¬ ± 2.5 years) were evaluated in a specialty concussion clinic for SRC during the 2020–2023 seasons. Cheerleaders were sorted into groups based on when their injury occurred (T1 = tryout/practice portion of season, T2 = beginning of competition season, T3 = end of season/coveted competitions). Mann–Whitney U Tests were used to evaluate differences between groups. Most All Star cheerleaders were evaluated for SRC during T2 (n = 32) compared to T1 (n = 12) and T3 (n = 8). Cheerleaders injured during T2 reported significantly lower PCSS scores (M = 21.0, IQR = 15.0–37.0) compared to T1 (M = 52.5, IQR = 27.5–60.8) and T3 (M = 46.9, IQR = 34.0–90.0), p = 0.01. There were no significant differences in days since injury (DSI; T1 M = 5.67, SD = 7.84; T2 M = 6.13, SD = 8.64; T3 M = 3.50, SD = 2.67) and evaluation of overall recovery time across groups (T1 M = 20.92, SD = 10.19; T2 M = 24.25, SD = 17.85; T3 M = 16.38, SD = 13.89; p > 0.05). Overall, cheerleaders injured during the beginning of competition season had the lowest PCSS scores upon evaluation, which may be due to presenting to clinic further from their injury. Though not significant, All Star cheerleaders were evaluated sooner during the coveted competitions portion of the season. Despite the small sample size, the pattern of results suggests that greater incentive and pressure to participate in coveted competitions may lead to quicker recovery times.

查看原文本刊更多论文

A - 04 赛季进展对明星啦啦队员脑震荡恢复的影响

对于拉拉队赛季进展对运动相关脑震荡（SRC）恢复轨迹的影响，目前还鲜有研究。本研究旨在评估赛季进展对全明星啦啦队运动员脑震荡恢复的影响。在 2020-2023 赛季期间，在脑震荡专科门诊对 8-18 岁（13.9.0¬ ± 2.5 岁）的女性全明星啦啦队员（n = 52）进行了 SRC 评估。根据拉拉队队员受伤的时间（T1 = 赛季试训/练习阶段，T2 = 赛季开始阶段，T3 = 赛季结束/比赛阶段）对他们进行分组。曼-惠特尼 U 检验用于评估组间差异。与 T1（12 人）和 T3（8 人）相比，大多数全明星啦啦队员在 T2（32 人）期间接受了 SRC 评估。与 T1（M = 52.5，IQR = 27.5-60.8）和 T3（M = 46.9，IQR = 34.0-90.0）相比，在 T2 期间受伤的啦啦队员的 PCSS 得分明显较低（M = 21.0，IQR = 15.0-37.0），p = 0.01。各组受伤后的天数（DSI；T1 男 = 5.67，女 = 7.84；T2 男 = 6.13，女 = 8.64；T3 男 = 3.50，女 = 2.67）和总体恢复时间评估（T1 男 = 20.92，女 = 10.19；T2 男 = 24.25，女 = 17.85；T3 男 = 16.38，女 = 13.89；P > 0.05）无明显差异。总体而言，在赛季开始时受伤的拉拉队员在评估时的 PCSS 分数最低，这可能是由于她们在受伤后较长时间内才到诊所就诊。全明星拉拉队队员在本赛季令人羡慕的比赛期间接受评估的时间较早，尽管这一点并不重要。尽管样本量较小，但结果模式表明，参加重要比赛的激励和压力更大，可能会导致更快的恢复时间。

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

Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 医学-心理学

CiteScore

4.60

自引率

7.70%

发文量

358

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： The journal publishes original contributions dealing with psychological aspects of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of disorders arising out of dysfunction of the central nervous system. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology will also consider manuscripts involving the established principles of the profession of neuropsychology: (a) delivery and evaluation of services, (b) ethical and legal issues, and (c) approaches to education and training. Preference will be given to empirical reports and key reviews. Brief research reports, case studies, and commentaries on published articles (not exceeding two printed pages) will also be considered. At the discretion of the editor, rebuttals to commentaries may be invited. Occasional papers of a theoretical nature will be considered.