棒球和垒球中与运动相关的脑震荡:损伤机制会影响恢复吗?

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurosurgical focus Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.3171/2024.4.FOCUS24144
John E Dugan, Connor C Long, Tyler Sills, Jacob Jo, Kristen L Williams, Douglas P Terry, Scott L Zuckerman
{"title":"棒球和垒球中与运动相关的脑震荡:损伤机制会影响恢复吗?","authors":"John E Dugan, Connor C Long, Tyler Sills, Jacob Jo, Kristen L Williams, Douglas P Terry, Scott L Zuckerman","doi":"10.3171/2024.4.FOCUS24144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Baseball and softball pose unique risks for sport-related concussion (SRC). Although these are not collision sports, concussions in baseball and softball can nonetheless involve high-speed impacts. In a regional, single-institution cohort of baseball and softball athletes who sustained an SRC, the current study sought to 1) describe the mechanisms of injury that led to SRC, and 2) compare initial symptom burden and recovery metrics across mechanisms, including time to return to learn (RTL), time to symptom resolution, and time to return to play (RTP) by mechanism of injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was performed of baseball and softball athletes 12 to 23 years old who sustained an SRC between November 2017 and April 2022. Mechanisms of injury were divided into two categories: 1) contact mechanism (i.e., what initiated contact with the injured player, such as head-to-ball), and 2) player mechanism (i.e., the action the injured player was performing at the time of injury, such as fielding). The recovery outcomes of time to RTL, symptom resolution, and RTP were compared between mechanisms using bivariate analysis and multivariable regression analysis, controlling for sex, age, time to present to concussion clinic, and initial total symptom score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sample included 58 baseball and softball players (60.3% female, mean age 16.0 ± 1.9 years). Most SRCs (62.1%) occurred during competition. Head-to-ball (50.0%) was the most common contact mechanism, followed by head-to-head/body (31.0%) and head-to-wall/ground/equipment (17.2%). Fielding (63.8%) was the most common player mechanism, followed by drills (20.7%) and running (13.8%). SRCs sustained in practice had significantly longer RTL (median 10.0 [interquartile range (IQR) 3.3-16.3] vs 4.0 [IQR 2.0-8.0] days; U = 421.5, p = 0.031) and symptom resolution (37.0 [IQR 18.0-90.0] vs 14.0 [IQR 7.0-41.0] days; U = 406.5, p = 0.025) compared with SRCs sustained in competition. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that head-to-wall/ground/equipment contact mechanism was associated with longer RTL (β = 0.30, 95% CI 0.07-0.54, p = 0.013).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The current study found that SRCs in baseball and softball occurred more often in competition than in practice. Head-to-ball and fielding were the most common contact and player mechanisms, respectively. SRCs sustained in practice were associated with longer time to RTL and symptom resolution, and head-to-wall/ground/equipment was associated with longer RTL in multivariable regression analysis. These results provide empirical data to improve concussion safety in baseball/softball.</p>","PeriodicalId":19187,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgical focus","volume":"57 1","pages":"E13"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sport-related concussions in baseball and softball: do mechanisms of injury affect recovery?\",\"authors\":\"John E Dugan, Connor C Long, Tyler Sills, Jacob Jo, Kristen L Williams, Douglas P Terry, Scott L Zuckerman\",\"doi\":\"10.3171/2024.4.FOCUS24144\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Baseball and softball pose unique risks for sport-related concussion (SRC). Although these are not collision sports, concussions in baseball and softball can nonetheless involve high-speed impacts. In a regional, single-institution cohort of baseball and softball athletes who sustained an SRC, the current study sought to 1) describe the mechanisms of injury that led to SRC, and 2) compare initial symptom burden and recovery metrics across mechanisms, including time to return to learn (RTL), time to symptom resolution, and time to return to play (RTP) by mechanism of injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was performed of baseball and softball athletes 12 to 23 years old who sustained an SRC between November 2017 and April 2022. Mechanisms of injury were divided into two categories: 1) contact mechanism (i.e., what initiated contact with the injured player, such as head-to-ball), and 2) player mechanism (i.e., the action the injured player was performing at the time of injury, such as fielding). The recovery outcomes of time to RTL, symptom resolution, and RTP were compared between mechanisms using bivariate analysis and multivariable regression analysis, controlling for sex, age, time to present to concussion clinic, and initial total symptom score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sample included 58 baseball and softball players (60.3% female, mean age 16.0 ± 1.9 years). Most SRCs (62.1%) occurred during competition. Head-to-ball (50.0%) was the most common contact mechanism, followed by head-to-head/body (31.0%) and head-to-wall/ground/equipment (17.2%). Fielding (63.8%) was the most common player mechanism, followed by drills (20.7%) and running (13.8%). SRCs sustained in practice had significantly longer RTL (median 10.0 [interquartile range (IQR) 3.3-16.3] vs 4.0 [IQR 2.0-8.0] days; U = 421.5, p = 0.031) and symptom resolution (37.0 [IQR 18.0-90.0] vs 14.0 [IQR 7.0-41.0] days; U = 406.5, p = 0.025) compared with SRCs sustained in competition. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that head-to-wall/ground/equipment contact mechanism was associated with longer RTL (β = 0.30, 95% CI 0.07-0.54, p = 0.013).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The current study found that SRCs in baseball and softball occurred more often in competition than in practice. Head-to-ball and fielding were the most common contact and player mechanisms, respectively. SRCs sustained in practice were associated with longer time to RTL and symptom resolution, and head-to-wall/ground/equipment was associated with longer RTL in multivariable regression analysis. These results provide empirical data to improve concussion safety in baseball/softball.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19187,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurosurgical focus\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"E13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurosurgical focus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3171/2024.4.FOCUS24144\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgical focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2024.4.FOCUS24144","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:棒球和垒球运动具有独特的运动相关脑震荡(SRC)风险。虽然这两种运动不属于碰撞运动,但棒球和垒球运动中的脑震荡仍可能涉及高速撞击。本研究在一个地区性、单一机构的棒垒球运动员队列中对遭受 SRC 的运动员进行了研究,旨在:1)描述导致 SRC 的损伤机制;2)比较不同机制的初始症状负担和恢复指标,包括按损伤机制划分的恢复学习时间(RTL)、症状缓解时间和恢复比赛时间(RTP):对2017年11月至2022年4月期间遭受SRC的12至23岁棒球和垒球运动员进行了一项回顾性队列研究。受伤机制分为两类:1)接触机制(即与受伤球员开始接触的原因,如头部对球);2)球员机制(即受伤时受伤球员正在进行的动作,如出界)。在控制性别、年龄、到脑震荡诊所就诊时间和初始症状总分的情况下,使用双变量分析和多变量回归分析比较了不同机制的恢复结果,包括RTL时间、症状缓解和RTP:样本包括 58 名棒球和垒球运动员(60.3% 为女性,平均年龄为 16.0 ± 1.9 岁)。大多数脑震荡(62.1%)发生在比赛期间。头碰球(50.0%)是最常见的接触机制,其次是头碰头/身体(31.0%)和头碰墙/地面/设备(17.2%)。实战(63.8%)是最常见的球员接触机制,其次是练习(20.7%)和奔跑(13.8%)。与在比赛中受伤的 SRC 相比,在训练中受伤的 SRC 的 RTL(中位数 10.0 [四分位距 (IQR) 3.3-16.3] vs 4.0 [IQR 2.0-8.0] 天;U = 421.5,p = 0.031)和症状缓解时间(37.0 [IQR 18.0-90.0] vs 14.0 [IQR 7.0-41.0] 天;U = 406.5,p = 0.025)明显更长。多变量回归分析显示,头顶墙/地面/器械接触机制与较长的 RTL 相关(β = 0.30,95% CI 0.07-0.54,p = 0.013):目前的研究发现,棒球和垒球比赛中发生 SRC 的频率高于训练中。头碰球和出界分别是最常见的接触和球员机制。在多变量回归分析中,在训练中发生的 SRC 与较长的 RTL 和症状缓解时间有关,而头撞墙/撞地/撞设备则与较长的 RTL 有关。这些结果为提高棒球/垒球运动中的脑震荡安全性提供了经验数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Sport-related concussions in baseball and softball: do mechanisms of injury affect recovery?

Objective: Baseball and softball pose unique risks for sport-related concussion (SRC). Although these are not collision sports, concussions in baseball and softball can nonetheless involve high-speed impacts. In a regional, single-institution cohort of baseball and softball athletes who sustained an SRC, the current study sought to 1) describe the mechanisms of injury that led to SRC, and 2) compare initial symptom burden and recovery metrics across mechanisms, including time to return to learn (RTL), time to symptom resolution, and time to return to play (RTP) by mechanism of injury.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed of baseball and softball athletes 12 to 23 years old who sustained an SRC between November 2017 and April 2022. Mechanisms of injury were divided into two categories: 1) contact mechanism (i.e., what initiated contact with the injured player, such as head-to-ball), and 2) player mechanism (i.e., the action the injured player was performing at the time of injury, such as fielding). The recovery outcomes of time to RTL, symptom resolution, and RTP were compared between mechanisms using bivariate analysis and multivariable regression analysis, controlling for sex, age, time to present to concussion clinic, and initial total symptom score.

Results: The sample included 58 baseball and softball players (60.3% female, mean age 16.0 ± 1.9 years). Most SRCs (62.1%) occurred during competition. Head-to-ball (50.0%) was the most common contact mechanism, followed by head-to-head/body (31.0%) and head-to-wall/ground/equipment (17.2%). Fielding (63.8%) was the most common player mechanism, followed by drills (20.7%) and running (13.8%). SRCs sustained in practice had significantly longer RTL (median 10.0 [interquartile range (IQR) 3.3-16.3] vs 4.0 [IQR 2.0-8.0] days; U = 421.5, p = 0.031) and symptom resolution (37.0 [IQR 18.0-90.0] vs 14.0 [IQR 7.0-41.0] days; U = 406.5, p = 0.025) compared with SRCs sustained in competition. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that head-to-wall/ground/equipment contact mechanism was associated with longer RTL (β = 0.30, 95% CI 0.07-0.54, p = 0.013).

Conclusions: The current study found that SRCs in baseball and softball occurred more often in competition than in practice. Head-to-ball and fielding were the most common contact and player mechanisms, respectively. SRCs sustained in practice were associated with longer time to RTL and symptom resolution, and head-to-wall/ground/equipment was associated with longer RTL in multivariable regression analysis. These results provide empirical data to improve concussion safety in baseball/softball.

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
Neurosurgical focus
Neurosurgical focus CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
261
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
Letter to the Editor. Management and long-term neurological outcomes of sdAVF. Leveraging machine learning for preoperative prediction of supramaximal ablation in laser interstitial thermal therapy for brain tumors. A propensity score-matched cost-effectiveness analysis of magnetic resonance-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy versus craniotomy for brain tumor radiation necrosis. Patient-reported outcome and preference after craniotomy and laser interstitial thermal therapy ablation: a pilot study. Stereotactic robot-assisted MRI-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy thalamotomy for medically intractable Holmes tremor: a pilot study and literature review.
×
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