ReFORM synthesis of the 6th International Consensus Statement on Concussion in Sport

Abstract

The sixth International Conference on Concussion in Sport took place 27–30 October 2022 in Amsterdam, Netherlands. It followed the fifth International Conference held in Berlin, Germany in October 2016, and aimed to provide updated recommendations regarding the prevention and management of concussions in sport based on the highest level of scientific evidence, the result of several systematic reviews of the literature.1–10 This editorial summarises key processes and recommendations from the Consensus Statement on Concussion in Sport.11 The preparation of these recommendations took several years, followed a robust methodology12 and was presented in a structured format. The organising committee was composed of representatives from international sports federations (Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile, Fédération Equestre Internationale, Fédération Internationale de Football Association, International Ice Hockey Federation, and World Rugby) and the International Olympic Committee. This organising committee proposed Co-Chairs of the Scientific Committee, who are also part of the Concussion in Sport Group (CISG). The Scientific Committee then invited lead authors and suggested coauthors (these recommendations were reviewed and amended by the lead authors) independent of the organising committee who had no input to the scientific process. A modified Delphi technique was used to devise the initial 12 questions that informed the Berlin International Conference on Concussion in Sport which were subsequently revised to 10 questions for the Amsterdam consensus.12 13 Ten themes around concussion were identified and evolved from previous iterations of the statement: prevention strategies, acute evaluation, office assessment, targeted interventions, rest and exercise, clinical recovery, evaluation of persisting symptoms, role of emerging technologies, retirement from sports and long-term effects. For each identified theme, the author group conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, with meta-analyses whenever possible, and then developed recommendations based on the results of these reviews.1–10 These …