Provision of Concussion Information From Coaches and the Presence of Athletic Trainers: Findings From the 2021 YouthStyles Survey

Summary of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Self-reported Traumatic Brain Injury Survey Efforts

OBJECTIVE

Surveillance of traumatic brain injury (TBI), including concussion, in the United States has historically relied on healthcare administrative datasets, but these methods likely underestimate the true burden of TBI. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recently added TBI prevalence questions to several national surveys. The objective of this article is to summarize their recent efforts and report TBI prevalence estimates.

SETTING

Surveys.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult and youth respondents to a series of national surveys.

DESIGN

Recent nationally representative surveys with either 12-month or lifetime TBI prevalence questions were identified.

MAIN MEASURES

For each data source, survey methodology, TBI definition, question wording, and prevalence estimates were examined.

RESULTS

TBI prevalence varied depending on the question wording and data source. Overall 12-month prevalence of concussion/TBI among adults ranged from 2% to 12% while overall lifetime prevalence of concussion or TBI ranged from 19% to 29%. Overall 12-month prevalence of concussion/TBI among children and adolescents was 10% while 12-month prevalence of sports- and recreation-related concussion for youth ranged from 7% to 15%. Overall lifetime prevalence of TBI among youth ranged from 6% to 14%.

CONCLUSION

Survey data based on self-reported concussions and TBIs resulted in larger prevalence estimates than would be expected based on traditional surveillance methods. Analyses of the various surveys shows that how the questions are asked and what terminology is used can notably affect the estimates observed. Efforts can be made to optimize and standardize data collection approaches to ensure consistent measurement across settings and populations.

Factors That May Influence Americans' Views on When Children Should Start Playing Tackle Football

CONTEXT

American football is associated with the largest number of emergency department visits for pediatric sport-related traumatic brain injury, including concussions. Tackling is responsible for almost two-thirds of football concussions. Some have recommended implementing age restrictions on tackling in youth football.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the public would support age restrictions and the factors that may drive such support.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Summer wave of Porter Novelli's 2020 US ConsumerStyles survey.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 4053 adults.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Respondents answered questions about a good age for children to start playing tackle football, past football playing history, concerns about safety, and the benefits and risks of playing football.

RESULTS

Most respondents believed that middle (32.8%) or high (27.8%) school was a good age to start playing tackle football. About 1 in 5 (19.8%) respondents reported that children should never play tackle football. Certain groups of individuals were more likely to support children starting to play tackle football at high school age or above or to say that they should never play tackle football, including those with a bachelor's degree or higher (rate ratio [RR]HS+ = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.14, 1.76; RRNEVER = 2.70, 95% CI = 1.93, 3.78), those who did not have children under 18 (RRHS+ = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.26, 1.90; RRNEVER = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.14, 2.07), those who were not football fans (RRNEVER = 3.07, 95% CI = 2.32, 4.06), and those who were very (RRHS+ = 3.94, 95% CI = 2.87, 5.42; RRNEVER = 11.52, 95% CI = 7.32, 18.15) or somewhat (RRHS+ = 1.88, 95% CI = 1.41, 2.52) concerned about the safety of children.

CONCLUSION

Despite acknowledging the benefits of playing football, many adults expressed concern about safety and endorsed high school age and older or never as a good age to start playing tackle football, highlighting a disconnect with current football program practices regarding age.

Concussion assessment and management - What do community-level cricket participants know?

OBJECTIVES

To explore Australian cricket participants' knowledge of concussion assessment and management, and awareness of current concussion guidelines.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

Novel and validated surveys were disseminated online, among over 16 year Australian cricket players and officials at the end of the 2018/19 cricket season. Data were collected on knowledge and awareness of concussion and analysed using descriptive statistics and crosstabulations. Further comparisons were made for the players between injured and non-injured, and helmet wearers and non-helmet wearers using Fisher's exact statistical test.

RESULTS

Both players (n = 224, 93 %) and officials (n = 36, 100 %) demonstrated strong knowledge of the importance of immediately evaluating suspected concussions. In comparison with players without helmets (n = 11), those using helmets (n = 135) considered replacing their helmets after a concussion to be vital to concussion assessment (p = 0.02). Overall, 80-97 % of players and 81-97 % of officials understood the importance of many factors regarding concussion management. When concussion management knowledge was compared by injury status, injured players (n = 17, 94 %) believed someone with a concussion should be hospitalised immediately, in contrast to non-injured players (n = 154, 69 %) (p = 0.04). Players (63 %) were less aware of concussion guidelines than officials (81 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the knowledge of concussion assessment and management was satisfactory. However, there were discrepancies among players on some aspects of awareness of concussion guidelines. Increasing players' familiarity and experience in using the concussion guidelines is warranted. Targeted campaigns are needed to further improve concussion recognition and treatment at community-level cricket, so all participants play a role in making cricket a safe sport.