A comparison of public views about sports concussion recovery with current guidelines: where are the gaps and overlaps?

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Brain Impairment Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.1071/IB23122
Karen A Sullivan, Kannan Singaravelu Jaganathan
{"title":"A comparison of public views about sports concussion recovery with current guidelines: where are the gaps and overlaps?","authors":"Karen A Sullivan, Kannan Singaravelu Jaganathan","doi":"10.1071/IB23122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background Sports concussion (SC) management guidelines have recently been updated. A key focus is the emphasis on rest (immediately postinjury) followed by gradual resumption of activity (active recovery). This study aimed to explore community views on SC management and compared these with the guidelines. Methods A total of 157 volunteers completed an online SC survey, including listing three pieces of advice for a concussed person immediately postinjury, and after 2weeks (subacute). Quantitative data were statistically compared, and qualitative data underwent content analysis. Results Almost all participants offered different immediate versus subacute advice; however, rest featured highly at both timepoints. Commonly expressed themes, consistent with guidelines were immediate rest; safety and reinjury prevention; and symptom monitoring. Two themes were identified in the community advice with limited emphasis in the guidelines: general health advice and psychological and social support. Expert clinical assessment was not always identified in community advice. Conclusion Community members hold some views that align with expert advice for SC, particularly the importance of immediate postinjury rest. However, there is scope to grow public awareness of some recommended practices, including expert clinical assessment following injury and when to engage in active recovery.</p>","PeriodicalId":56329,"journal":{"name":"Brain Impairment","volume":"25 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain Impairment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/IB23122","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Sports concussion (SC) management guidelines have recently been updated. A key focus is the emphasis on rest (immediately postinjury) followed by gradual resumption of activity (active recovery). This study aimed to explore community views on SC management and compared these with the guidelines. Methods A total of 157 volunteers completed an online SC survey, including listing three pieces of advice for a concussed person immediately postinjury, and after 2weeks (subacute). Quantitative data were statistically compared, and qualitative data underwent content analysis. Results Almost all participants offered different immediate versus subacute advice; however, rest featured highly at both timepoints. Commonly expressed themes, consistent with guidelines were immediate rest; safety and reinjury prevention; and symptom monitoring. Two themes were identified in the community advice with limited emphasis in the guidelines: general health advice and psychological and social support. Expert clinical assessment was not always identified in community advice. Conclusion Community members hold some views that align with expert advice for SC, particularly the importance of immediate postinjury rest. However, there is scope to grow public awareness of some recommended practices, including expert clinical assessment following injury and when to engage in active recovery.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公众对运动脑震荡康复的看法与现行指南的比较:差距和重叠在哪里?
背景 运动性脑震荡(SC)管理指南最近已更新。其中一个重点是强调休息(受伤后立即休息),然后逐步恢复活动(积极恢复)。本研究旨在探讨社区对 SC 管理的看法,并将其与指南进行比较。方法 共有 157 名志愿者完成了一项在线脑震荡调查,调查内容包括为脑震荡患者在伤后即刻和两周后(亚急性期)提供的三条建议。对定量数据进行了统计比较,并对定性数据进行了内容分析。结果 几乎所有参与者都提供了不同的即时建议和亚急性建议;然而,休息在两个时间点上都占据了重要位置。与指南一致的共同主题是立即休息、安全和防止再次受伤以及症状监测。在社区建议中确定了两个主题,但在指南中的强调程度有限:一般健康建议以及心理和社会支持。在社区建议中,并不总能找到专家临床评估。结论 社区成员持有的一些观点与 SC 专家建议一致,特别是受伤后立即休息的重要性。不过,公众对一些建议做法的认识还有待提高,包括受伤后的专家临床评估以及何时进行积极恢复。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Brain Impairment
Brain Impairment CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-NEUROSCIENCES
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal addresses topics related to the aetiology, epidemiology, treatment and outcomes of brain impairment with a particular focus on the implications for functional status, participation, rehabilitation and quality of life. Disciplines reflect a broad multidisciplinary scope and include neuroscience, neurology, neuropsychology, psychiatry, clinical psychology, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, speech pathology, social work, and nursing. Submissions are welcome across the full range of conditions that affect brain function (stroke, tumour, progressive neurological illnesses, dementia, traumatic brain injury, epilepsy, etc.) throughout the lifespan.
期刊最新文献
Feasibility of accelerometry in a self-directed upper limb activity program of a subacute setting with stroke survivors. Health literacy after traumatic brain injury: characterisation and control comparison. Perceptions and experiences of health professionals when supporting adults with stroke to engage in physical activity. Editorial: Clinical implementation to optimise outcomes for people with brain conditions. The development of a cognitive screening protocol for Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples: the Guddi Way screen.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1