Repeated measures of cognitive processing efficiency in adolescent athletes: implications for monitoring recovery from concussion.

J C Daniel, M H Olesniewicz, D L Reeves, D Tam, J Bleiberg, R Thatcher, A Salazar
{"title":"Repeated measures of cognitive processing efficiency in adolescent athletes: implications for monitoring recovery from concussion.","authors":"J C Daniel,&nbsp;M H Olesniewicz,&nbsp;D L Reeves,&nbsp;D Tam,&nbsp;J Bleiberg,&nbsp;R Thatcher,&nbsp;A Salazar","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to determine whether an adolescent athlete, in the absence of concussion, would be expected to show an improvement in cognitive function during the course of a high school football season.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>At least 60,000 American high school football players suffer cerebral concussion every year, and symptoms may persist for 4 or more years in as many as 24%.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>34 members of a cohort of healthy athletes, aged 13-18, were administered a computerized neuropsychologic test battery from the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics (ANAM) before and after the 1997 high school football season, with a mean interval of 16.1 (range 12.3-20.4) weeks between tests. Preseason and postseason scores on eight tests were compared, with significance determined by paired t-test. For those tests in which an improvement was noted, one-way analysis of variance and Wilcoxon tests were used with both preseason and postseason data to determine if there was a measurable difference in cognitive processing efficiency between older and younger subjects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Improvements in processing efficiency (p < 0.001) were noted on tests designed to measure visual scanning and sustained attention (CDS), immediate recall (CDI), and short-term memory (CDD). Older subjects generally performed better on each of these tests, though the difference was significant in only one case (postseason CDI, 17-18 year olds vs. 13-14 year olds, Wilcoxon, p = 0.043).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings suggest that ANAM is sensitive to differences and improvements in cognitive function during a 4 month interval in adolescence. They also suggest that using \"return to baseline\" cognitive function as the criterion for evidence of recovery from concussion may be insufficient, especially when the baseline measurement was obtained 4 or more months prior to the date of \"full recovery.\"</p>","PeriodicalId":79516,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychiatry, neuropsychology, and behavioral neurology","volume":"12 3","pages":"167-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychiatry, neuropsychology, and behavioral neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to determine whether an adolescent athlete, in the absence of concussion, would be expected to show an improvement in cognitive function during the course of a high school football season.

Background: At least 60,000 American high school football players suffer cerebral concussion every year, and symptoms may persist for 4 or more years in as many as 24%.

Method: 34 members of a cohort of healthy athletes, aged 13-18, were administered a computerized neuropsychologic test battery from the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics (ANAM) before and after the 1997 high school football season, with a mean interval of 16.1 (range 12.3-20.4) weeks between tests. Preseason and postseason scores on eight tests were compared, with significance determined by paired t-test. For those tests in which an improvement was noted, one-way analysis of variance and Wilcoxon tests were used with both preseason and postseason data to determine if there was a measurable difference in cognitive processing efficiency between older and younger subjects.

Results: Improvements in processing efficiency (p < 0.001) were noted on tests designed to measure visual scanning and sustained attention (CDS), immediate recall (CDI), and short-term memory (CDD). Older subjects generally performed better on each of these tests, though the difference was significant in only one case (postseason CDI, 17-18 year olds vs. 13-14 year olds, Wilcoxon, p = 0.043).

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that ANAM is sensitive to differences and improvements in cognitive function during a 4 month interval in adolescence. They also suggest that using "return to baseline" cognitive function as the criterion for evidence of recovery from concussion may be insufficient, especially when the baseline measurement was obtained 4 or more months prior to the date of "full recovery."

青少年运动员认知加工效率的重复测量:监测脑震荡恢复的意义。
目的:本研究的目的是确定在没有脑震荡的情况下,青少年运动员在高中足球赛季的过程中是否会表现出认知功能的改善。背景:每年至少有6万名美国高中橄榄球运动员患有脑震荡,其中24%的人症状可能持续4年或更长时间。方法:对34名年龄在13-18岁的健康运动员在1997年高中足球赛季前后进行了计算机神经心理自动评估量表(ANAM)的神经心理测试,测试间隔平均为16.1周(12.3-20.4周)。季前赛和季后赛的八项测试得分比较,配对t检验确定显著性。对于那些注意到改善的测试,对季前赛和季后赛数据使用了单向方差分析和Wilcoxon测试,以确定老年人和年轻人之间的认知处理效率是否存在可测量的差异。结果:在设计用于测量视觉扫描和持续注意(CDS)、即时回忆(CDI)和短期记忆(CDD)的测试中,加工效率得到了改善(p < 0.001)。年龄较大的受试者通常在这些测试中表现更好,尽管只有一种情况下差异显着(季后赛CDI, 17-18岁vs. 13-14岁,Wilcoxon, p = 0.043)。结论:我们的研究结果表明,ANAM对青春期4个月间认知功能的差异和改善很敏感。他们还建议,使用“恢复基线”认知功能作为脑震荡恢复证据的标准可能是不够的,特别是当基线测量是在“完全恢复”日期之前4个月或更长时间获得的。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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