多方面脑震荡评估电池:灵敏度牺牲特异性?

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Physician and Sportsmedicine Pub Date : 2024-12-23 DOI:10.1080/00913847.2024.2442901
Caitlynn Slocum, Jody L Langdon, Barry A Munkasy, Benjamin Brewer, Jessie R Oldham, Vicky Graham, Thomas A Buckley
{"title":"多方面脑震荡评估电池:灵敏度牺牲特异性?","authors":"Caitlynn Slocum, Jody L Langdon, Barry A Munkasy, Benjamin Brewer, Jessie R Oldham, Vicky Graham, Thomas A Buckley","doi":"10.1080/00913847.2024.2442901","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>A multifaceted assessment battery is recommended for testing suspected concussed athletes; however, the individual tests have limitations and potentially may lead to false positive outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to psychometrically evaluate concussion assessment tools used for intercollegiate student-athletes, with a focus on the time interval between baseline and subsequent assessments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ninety-two collegiate student-athletes matched between concussion (<i>N</i> = 46. F32/M14) and non-concussion (<i>N</i> = 46, 32F/14 M) completed the standard assessment of concussion, balance error scoring system, symptom questionnaire, and computerized neurocognitive tests at baseline and acutely (<48 h) following a concussion. Test outcomes were compared between time points with three approaches: 1) vs baseline, 2) reliable change scores (RCI), and 3) vs American College of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM). Concussion assessment sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, predictive values, and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated. A receiver operator characteristic compared area under the curve (AUC) for the overall battery as well as between academic years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sensitivity of the battery was high (78.3-95.7%), but specificity was low to moderate (6.5-52.2%) with comparison to the RCI typically performing best. The three approaches yielded AUC values between 0.51 and 0.63 which is below the discriminatory threshold (0.70) with comparison to RCI performing best. By academic year, Juniors was the only year in which the ROC exceeded the threshold (0.75). The number of tests failed did not improve any AUC values (0.51-0.69) to exceed the threshold.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The outcomes of this study support the premise that concussion must be evaluated using a comprehensive clinical examination including a variety of assessments to evaluate each clinical domain. Clinicians need to recognize that the multifaceted assessment battery has high sensitivity, but the overall psychometrics do not exceed the threshold for group discrimination and caution must be used in their interpretation.</p>","PeriodicalId":51268,"journal":{"name":"Physician and Sportsmedicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multifaceted concussion assessment battery: sensitivity at the expense of specificity?\",\"authors\":\"Caitlynn Slocum, Jody L Langdon, Barry A Munkasy, Benjamin Brewer, Jessie R Oldham, Vicky Graham, Thomas A Buckley\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00913847.2024.2442901\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>A multifaceted assessment battery is recommended for testing suspected concussed athletes; however, the individual tests have limitations and potentially may lead to false positive outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to psychometrically evaluate concussion assessment tools used for intercollegiate student-athletes, with a focus on the time interval between baseline and subsequent assessments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ninety-two collegiate student-athletes matched between concussion (<i>N</i> = 46. F32/M14) and non-concussion (<i>N</i> = 46, 32F/14 M) completed the standard assessment of concussion, balance error scoring system, symptom questionnaire, and computerized neurocognitive tests at baseline and acutely (<48 h) following a concussion. Test outcomes were compared between time points with three approaches: 1) vs baseline, 2) reliable change scores (RCI), and 3) vs American College of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM). Concussion assessment sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, predictive values, and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated. A receiver operator characteristic compared area under the curve (AUC) for the overall battery as well as between academic years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sensitivity of the battery was high (78.3-95.7%), but specificity was low to moderate (6.5-52.2%) with comparison to the RCI typically performing best. The three approaches yielded AUC values between 0.51 and 0.63 which is below the discriminatory threshold (0.70) with comparison to RCI performing best. By academic year, Juniors was the only year in which the ROC exceeded the threshold (0.75). The number of tests failed did not improve any AUC values (0.51-0.69) to exceed the threshold.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The outcomes of this study support the premise that concussion must be evaluated using a comprehensive clinical examination including a variety of assessments to evaluate each clinical domain. Clinicians need to recognize that the multifaceted assessment battery has high sensitivity, but the overall psychometrics do not exceed the threshold for group discrimination and caution must be used in their interpretation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51268,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physician and Sportsmedicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-10\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physician and Sportsmedicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00913847.2024.2442901\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physician and Sportsmedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00913847.2024.2442901","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:建议对疑似脑震荡运动员进行多方面评估;然而,个别测试有局限性,并可能导致假阳性结果。因此,本研究的目的是对校际学生运动员使用的脑震荡评估工具进行心理测量学评估,重点关注基线和后续评估之间的时间间隔。方法:对92名大学生运动员进行脑震荡配对(N = 46)。F32/M14)和非脑震荡(N = 46, 32F/14 M)完成了基线和急性期脑震荡、平衡误差评分系统、症状问卷和计算机化神经认知测试的标准评估(结果:电池的灵敏度高(78.3 - 95.7%),但特异性较低至中等(6.5 - 52.2%),与RCI相比,通常表现最好。三种方法的AUC值在0.51 - 0.63之间,低于歧视性阈值(0.70),与RCI相比表现最佳。按学年划分,三年级是唯一一个ROC超过阈值(0.75)的年级。失败的测试次数没有使任何AUC值(0.51 - 0.69)提高到超过阈值。结论:本研究的结果支持了一个前提,即脑震荡必须通过全面的临床检查来评估,包括各种评估来评估每个临床领域。临床医生需要认识到多方面的评估具有很高的敏感性,但总体心理测量不超过群体歧视的阈值,在解释时必须谨慎。
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
Multifaceted concussion assessment battery: sensitivity at the expense of specificity?

Objectives: A multifaceted assessment battery is recommended for testing suspected concussed athletes; however, the individual tests have limitations and potentially may lead to false positive outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to psychometrically evaluate concussion assessment tools used for intercollegiate student-athletes, with a focus on the time interval between baseline and subsequent assessments.

Methods: Ninety-two collegiate student-athletes matched between concussion (N = 46. F32/M14) and non-concussion (N = 46, 32F/14 M) completed the standard assessment of concussion, balance error scoring system, symptom questionnaire, and computerized neurocognitive tests at baseline and acutely (<48 h) following a concussion. Test outcomes were compared between time points with three approaches: 1) vs baseline, 2) reliable change scores (RCI), and 3) vs American College of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM). Concussion assessment sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, predictive values, and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated. A receiver operator characteristic compared area under the curve (AUC) for the overall battery as well as between academic years.

Results: The sensitivity of the battery was high (78.3-95.7%), but specificity was low to moderate (6.5-52.2%) with comparison to the RCI typically performing best. The three approaches yielded AUC values between 0.51 and 0.63 which is below the discriminatory threshold (0.70) with comparison to RCI performing best. By academic year, Juniors was the only year in which the ROC exceeded the threshold (0.75). The number of tests failed did not improve any AUC values (0.51-0.69) to exceed the threshold.

Conclusions: The outcomes of this study support the premise that concussion must be evaluated using a comprehensive clinical examination including a variety of assessments to evaluate each clinical domain. Clinicians need to recognize that the multifaceted assessment battery has high sensitivity, but the overall psychometrics do not exceed the threshold for group discrimination and caution must be used in their interpretation.

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
Physician and Sportsmedicine
Physician and Sportsmedicine PRIMARY HEALTH CARE-ORTHOPEDICS
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
60
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Physician and Sportsmedicine is a peer-reviewed, clinically oriented publication for primary care physicians. We examine the latest drug discoveries to advance treatment and recovery, and take into account the medical aspects of exercise therapy for a given condition. We cover the latest primary care-focused treatments serving the needs of our active patient population, and assess the limits these treatments govern in stabilization and recovery. The Physician and Sportsmedicine is a peer-to-peer method of communicating the latest research to aid primary care physicians’ advancement in methods of care and treatment. We routinely cover such topics as: managing chronic disease, surgical techniques in preventing and managing injuries, the latest advancements in treatments for helping patients lose weight, and related exercise and nutrition topics that can impact the patient during recovery and modification.
期刊最新文献
Return to play and athletic performance in division I female volleyball players following anterior cruciate ligament injury. Degenerative changes of the wrist in mixed martial arts and boxing based on the three column theory. Impact of repeated sportive chokes on carotid intima media thickness and brain injury biomarkers in grappling athletes. Illness is more prevalent than injury in trail runners participating in a mountainous ultra trail race. Medical advisability of softball youth pitching recommendations on the internet.
×
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