运动相关脑震荡和前交叉韧带损伤对神经认知和神经机械反应时间的单独和综合影响。

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES
Ryan N Moran, Dustin R Grooms
{"title":"运动相关脑震荡和前交叉韧带损伤对神经认知和神经机械反应时间的单独和综合影响。","authors":"Ryan N Moran, Dustin R Grooms","doi":"10.4085/1062-6050-0369.24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Recent epidemiological data indicates a potential connection between sport-related concussion (SRC) and elevated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk. Limited research exists quantifying cognitive and motor outcome measures between SRC and ACL injury history.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine the individual and combined effects of a history of SRC and ACL injury and reconstruction (ACLR) on neurocognitive and neuromechanical function.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Research laboratory.</p><p><strong>Patients or other participants: </strong>47 recreationally active college individuals with either an injury history of SRC (n=12), ACLR (n=12), combination of SRC+ACLR (n=11), or uninjured controls (n=12).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Participants completed a neurological battery using the C3 Logix application and TRAZER system for neuromechanical reaction time (RT). C3 Logix sub-tests consisted of the Trail Making Test (TMT) A,B, and B -/minus A, simple and choice RT, and processing speed. TRAZER sub-tests consisted of simple, Flanker-task, and Stroop-task RT. Participants were categorized into 3 group comparisons of either: (i) SRC, ACLR, SRC+ACLR, and controls, (ii) Any or No SRC overall, (iii) Any or No ACLR overall.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No differences were demonstrated between SRC, ACLR, SRC+ACLR, and controls on TMT (p=.07-.14), neurocognitive (p=.14-.93) or neuromechanical (p=.64-.99) performance. Those with Any SRC had slower TMT B-A times (p=.03), while those with Any ACLR had slower Trail A (p=.02) times when compared to those with no ACLR. No differences were noted for TRAZER simple, Flanker, or Stroop RT for Any or No SRC and ACLR groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>College students with a combined effect of SRC and ACLR did not differ from other groups on neurocognition and neuromechanical reaction time. Individuals with a history of SRC or ACLR had worse TMT, leading to inquiry about potential long-term neurological deficits, despite no differences in those with a combined history.</p>","PeriodicalId":54875,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Athletic Training","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Individual and combined effects of sport-related concussion and ACL injury on neurocognitive and neuromechanical reaction time.\",\"authors\":\"Ryan N Moran, Dustin R Grooms\",\"doi\":\"10.4085/1062-6050-0369.24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Recent epidemiological data indicates a potential connection between sport-related concussion (SRC) and elevated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk. Limited research exists quantifying cognitive and motor outcome measures between SRC and ACL injury history.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine the individual and combined effects of a history of SRC and ACL injury and reconstruction (ACLR) on neurocognitive and neuromechanical function.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Research laboratory.</p><p><strong>Patients or other participants: </strong>47 recreationally active college individuals with either an injury history of SRC (n=12), ACLR (n=12), combination of SRC+ACLR (n=11), or uninjured controls (n=12).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Participants completed a neurological battery using the C3 Logix application and TRAZER system for neuromechanical reaction time (RT). C3 Logix sub-tests consisted of the Trail Making Test (TMT) A,B, and B -/minus A, simple and choice RT, and processing speed. TRAZER sub-tests consisted of simple, Flanker-task, and Stroop-task RT. Participants were categorized into 3 group comparisons of either: (i) SRC, ACLR, SRC+ACLR, and controls, (ii) Any or No SRC overall, (iii) Any or No ACLR overall.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No differences were demonstrated between SRC, ACLR, SRC+ACLR, and controls on TMT (p=.07-.14), neurocognitive (p=.14-.93) or neuromechanical (p=.64-.99) performance. Those with Any SRC had slower TMT B-A times (p=.03), while those with Any ACLR had slower Trail A (p=.02) times when compared to those with no ACLR. No differences were noted for TRAZER simple, Flanker, or Stroop RT for Any or No SRC and ACLR groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>College students with a combined effect of SRC and ACLR did not differ from other groups on neurocognition and neuromechanical reaction time. Individuals with a history of SRC or ACLR had worse TMT, leading to inquiry about potential long-term neurological deficits, despite no differences in those with a combined history.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54875,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Athletic Training\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Athletic Training\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-0369.24\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Athletic Training","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-0369.24","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

摘要

背景:最近的流行病学数据表明,运动相关脑震荡(SRC)与前十字韧带(ACL)损伤风险升高之间存在潜在联系。对 SRC 与前十字韧带损伤史之间的认知和运动结果测量进行量化的研究有限:目的:研究SRC和前交叉韧带损伤与重建(ACLR)史对神经认知和神经机械功能的个体和综合影响:横断面研究:患者或其他参与者47名有SRC损伤史(12人)、ACLR损伤史(12人)、SRC+ACLR组合损伤史(11人)或未受伤对照组(12人)的从事娱乐活动的大学生:参与者使用 C3 Logix 应用程序和 TRAZER 系统完成神经肌肉反应时间(RT)测试。C3 Logix 的子测试包括路径制作测试(TMT)A、B 和 B -/minus A、简单和选择反应时间以及处理速度。TRAZER子测试包括简单任务、侧翼任务和Stroop任务的RT。参与者被分为 3 组进行比较:(i) SRC、ACLR、SRC+ACLR 和对照组,(ii) 任何或无 SRC 组,(iii) 任何或无 ACLR 组:结果:SRC、ACLR、SRC+ACLR 和对照组在 TMT(p=.07-.14)、神经认知(p=.14-.93)或神经机械(p=.64-.99)表现上没有差异。与无 ACLR 的人相比,有任何 SRC 的人 TMT B-A 时间较慢(p=.03),而有任何 ACLR 的人 Trail A 时间较慢(p=.02)。在 TRAZER 简单、Flanker 或 Stroop RT 方面,有无 SRC 组和 ACLR 组之间没有差异:结论:在神经认知和神经机械反应时间方面,有SRC和ACLR合并影响的大学生与其他组别没有差异。有SRC或ACLR病史的人的TMT较差,导致人们对潜在的长期神经功能缺陷产生疑问,尽管有合并病史的人在这方面没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Individual and combined effects of sport-related concussion and ACL injury on neurocognitive and neuromechanical reaction time.

Context: Recent epidemiological data indicates a potential connection between sport-related concussion (SRC) and elevated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk. Limited research exists quantifying cognitive and motor outcome measures between SRC and ACL injury history.

Objective: To examine the individual and combined effects of a history of SRC and ACL injury and reconstruction (ACLR) on neurocognitive and neuromechanical function.

Design: Cross-sectional study.

Setting: Research laboratory.

Patients or other participants: 47 recreationally active college individuals with either an injury history of SRC (n=12), ACLR (n=12), combination of SRC+ACLR (n=11), or uninjured controls (n=12).

Main outcome measures: Participants completed a neurological battery using the C3 Logix application and TRAZER system for neuromechanical reaction time (RT). C3 Logix sub-tests consisted of the Trail Making Test (TMT) A,B, and B -/minus A, simple and choice RT, and processing speed. TRAZER sub-tests consisted of simple, Flanker-task, and Stroop-task RT. Participants were categorized into 3 group comparisons of either: (i) SRC, ACLR, SRC+ACLR, and controls, (ii) Any or No SRC overall, (iii) Any or No ACLR overall.

Results: No differences were demonstrated between SRC, ACLR, SRC+ACLR, and controls on TMT (p=.07-.14), neurocognitive (p=.14-.93) or neuromechanical (p=.64-.99) performance. Those with Any SRC had slower TMT B-A times (p=.03), while those with Any ACLR had slower Trail A (p=.02) times when compared to those with no ACLR. No differences were noted for TRAZER simple, Flanker, or Stroop RT for Any or No SRC and ACLR groups.

Conclusions: College students with a combined effect of SRC and ACLR did not differ from other groups on neurocognition and neuromechanical reaction time. Individuals with a history of SRC or ACLR had worse TMT, leading to inquiry about potential long-term neurological deficits, despite no differences in those with a combined history.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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