对足球中脑震荡教育、知识和态度的系统回顾。

Ryan Baker, Bert Bond, Gareth Irwin, Sean Connelly, Genevieve Williams
{"title":"对足球中脑震荡教育、知识和态度的系统回顾。","authors":"Ryan Baker, Bert Bond, Gareth Irwin, Sean Connelly, Genevieve Williams","doi":"10.1080/24733938.2025.2488521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Detecting concussion during football games is difficult due to the complexity of the condition. Medical staff may only enter the field to assess players when the injury is recognised by the referee. With no temporary concussion substitutions available, pitch-side testing often depends on medics recognising, or players self-reporting, symptoms. The aim of this review is to provide a summary of the literature examining the concussion education, knowledge and attitudes of players, coaches, medics, and officials in association football. A literature search based on PRISMA guidelines was conducted using PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science up to 12 January 2024. Papers were ineligible if the outcome of the survey or questionnaire was concussion incidence or over 50% of participants did not play football. A total of 21 studies were included. Of these studies 14 evaluated concussion education,11 evaluated concussion knowledge and 14 evaluated attitudes towards concussion. Study quality was assessed using the appropriate Joanna Briggs Critical Appraisal Tool. Results show that participants who have previously undergone concussion education have greater concussion knowledge. However, concussion attitudes do not appear to improve with increased concussion knowledge. Players are still likely to continue playing while injured in important games. Coaches, and officials have safer attitudes towards concussion than players. Consistency in participant groups and methods used to test knowledge and attitudes was low. All papers included suffer from medium to high risks of bias, therefore the strength of evidence is weak. Published research examining concussion knowledge, attitudes and education in football is limited.</p>","PeriodicalId":74767,"journal":{"name":"Science & medicine in football","volume":" ","pages":"1-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic review of concussion education, knowledge, and attitudes in football.\",\"authors\":\"Ryan Baker, Bert Bond, Gareth Irwin, Sean Connelly, Genevieve Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/24733938.2025.2488521\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Detecting concussion during football games is difficult due to the complexity of the condition. Medical staff may only enter the field to assess players when the injury is recognised by the referee. With no temporary concussion substitutions available, pitch-side testing often depends on medics recognising, or players self-reporting, symptoms. The aim of this review is to provide a summary of the literature examining the concussion education, knowledge and attitudes of players, coaches, medics, and officials in association football. A literature search based on PRISMA guidelines was conducted using PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science up to 12 January 2024. Papers were ineligible if the outcome of the survey or questionnaire was concussion incidence or over 50% of participants did not play football. A total of 21 studies were included. Of these studies 14 evaluated concussion education,11 evaluated concussion knowledge and 14 evaluated attitudes towards concussion. Study quality was assessed using the appropriate Joanna Briggs Critical Appraisal Tool. Results show that participants who have previously undergone concussion education have greater concussion knowledge. However, concussion attitudes do not appear to improve with increased concussion knowledge. Players are still likely to continue playing while injured in important games. Coaches, and officials have safer attitudes towards concussion than players. Consistency in participant groups and methods used to test knowledge and attitudes was low. All papers included suffer from medium to high risks of bias, therefore the strength of evidence is weak. Published research examining concussion knowledge, attitudes and education in football is limited.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74767,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science & medicine in football\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science & medicine in football\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/24733938.2025.2488521\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science & medicine in football","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24733938.2025.2488521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于情况的复杂性,在足球比赛中检测脑震荡是很困难的。只有在裁判确认伤情后,医务人员才能进入场地对球员进行检查。由于没有临时的脑震荡替补,球场边的测试通常取决于医生对症状的识别或球员的自我报告。这篇综述的目的是对有关脑震荡教育、球员、教练、医务人员和足协官员的知识和态度的文献进行总结。基于PRISMA指南的文献检索使用PubMed, SPORTDiscus和Web of Science进行,截止到2024年1月12日。如果调查或问卷的结果是脑震荡发生率或超过50%的参与者不踢足球,则论文不合格。共纳入21项研究。其中14项研究评估脑震荡教育,11项研究评估脑震荡知识,14项研究评估对脑震荡的态度。使用适当的乔安娜布里格斯关键评估工具评估研究质量。结果表明,接受过脑震荡教育的被试对脑震荡有更高的认知。然而,对脑震荡的态度似乎并没有随着脑震荡知识的增加而改善。在重要比赛中受伤的球员仍有可能继续比赛。教练和官员对脑震荡的态度比球员更安全。参与者群体和用于测试知识和态度的方法的一致性很低。所有纳入的论文均存在中至高偏倚风险,因此证据强度较弱。发表的关于脑震荡知识、态度和足球教育的研究是有限的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A systematic review of concussion education, knowledge, and attitudes in football.

Detecting concussion during football games is difficult due to the complexity of the condition. Medical staff may only enter the field to assess players when the injury is recognised by the referee. With no temporary concussion substitutions available, pitch-side testing often depends on medics recognising, or players self-reporting, symptoms. The aim of this review is to provide a summary of the literature examining the concussion education, knowledge and attitudes of players, coaches, medics, and officials in association football. A literature search based on PRISMA guidelines was conducted using PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science up to 12 January 2024. Papers were ineligible if the outcome of the survey or questionnaire was concussion incidence or over 50% of participants did not play football. A total of 21 studies were included. Of these studies 14 evaluated concussion education,11 evaluated concussion knowledge and 14 evaluated attitudes towards concussion. Study quality was assessed using the appropriate Joanna Briggs Critical Appraisal Tool. Results show that participants who have previously undergone concussion education have greater concussion knowledge. However, concussion attitudes do not appear to improve with increased concussion knowledge. Players are still likely to continue playing while injured in important games. Coaches, and officials have safer attitudes towards concussion than players. Consistency in participant groups and methods used to test knowledge and attitudes was low. All papers included suffer from medium to high risks of bias, therefore the strength of evidence is weak. Published research examining concussion knowledge, attitudes and education in football is limited.

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
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