The development of prevention strategies is critical to address the rising prevalence of sport-related concussions. Visual and sensory performance may influence an individual's ability to interpret environmental cues, anticipate opponents' actions, and create appropriate motor responses limiting the severity of an impending head impact. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between traditional and visual sensory reaction time measures, and the association between visual and sensory performance and head impact severity in college football players. Thirty-eight collegiate football players participated in the study. We used real-time data collection instrumentation to record head impact biomechanics during games and practices. Our findings reveal no significant correlations between reaction time on traditional and visual sensory measures. We found a significant association between head impact severity and level of visual and sensory performance for multiple assessments, with low visual and sensory performers sustaining a higher number of severe head impacts. Our findings reveal a link between level of visual and sensory performance and head impact biomechanics. Future research will allow clinicians to have the most appropriate testing batteries to identify at-risk athletes and create interventions to decrease their risk of injurious head impacts.

Head impact biomechanics studies have provided valuable insights into understanding collision sports and for informing evidence-based rule and policy changes. These have included changing the football kickoff, ice hockey body checking ages, and head-to-head hits in both sports. Given soccer's global popularity, and the growing public concern for the potential long-term neurological implications of collision and contact sports, studying soccer has the potential to impact many athletes and the sports medicine professionals caring for them.

This article is a systematic review of the literature on divided attention assessment inclusive of a cognitive and motor task (balance or gait) for use in concussion management. The systematic review drew from published papers listed in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases. The search identified 19 empirical research papers meeting the inclusion criteria. Study results were considered for the psychometric properties of the paradigms, the influence of divided attention on measures of cognition and postural control and the comparison of divided attention task outcomes between individuals with concussion and healthy controls (all samples were age 17 years or older). The review highlights that the reliability of the tasks under a divided attention paradigm presented ranges from low to high (ICC: 0.1-0.9); however, only 3/19 articles included psychometric information. Response times are greater, gait strategies are less efficient, and postural control deficits are greater in concussed participants compared with healthy controls both immediately and for some period following concussive injury, specifically under divided attention conditions. Dual task assessments in some cases were more reliable than single task assessments and may be better able to detect lingering effects following concussion. Few of the studies have been replicated and applied across various age groups. A key limitation of these studies is that many include laboratory and time-intensive measures. Future research is needed to refine a time and cost efficient divided attention assessment paradigm, and more work is needed in younger (pre-teens) populations where the application may be of greatest utility.

Background:Neurocognitive testing is an important concussion evaluation tool, but for neurocognitive tests to be useful, their psychometric properties must be well established. Test-retest reliability of computerized neurocognitive tests can influence their clinical utility. The reliability for a commonly used computerized neurocognitive test, CNS Vital Signs, is not well established. The purpose of this study was to examine test-retest reliability and reliable change indices for CNS Vital Signs in a healthy, physically active college population.Hypothesis:CNS Vital Signs yields acceptable test-retest reliability, with greater reliability between the second and third test administration compared with between the first and second administration.Study Design:Cohort study.Level of Evidence:Level 3.Methods:Forty healthy, active volunteers (16 men, 24 women; mean age, 21.05 ± 2.17 years) reported to a clinical laboratory for 3 sessions, 1 week apart. At each session, participants were administered CNS Vital Signs. Outcomes included standard scores for the following CNS Vital Signs domains: verbal memory, visual memory, psychomotor speed, cognitive flexibility, complex attention, processing speed, reaction time, executive functioning, and reasoning.Results:Participants performed significantly better on the second session and/or third session than they did on the first testing session on 6 of 9 neurocognitive domains. Pearson r test-retest correlations between sessions ranged from 0.11 to 0.87. Intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.10 to 0.86.Conclusion:Clinicians should consider using reliable change indices to account for practice effects, identify meaningful score changes due to pathology, and inform clinical decisions.Clinical Relevance:This study highlights the importance of clinicians understanding the psychometric properties of computerized neurocognitive tests when using them in the management of sport-related concussion. If CNS Vital Signs is administered twice within a small time frame (such as 1 week), athletes should be expected to improve between the first and second administration.