Wearable sensors that accurately record head impacts experienced by athletes during play can enable a wide range of potential applications including equipment improvements, player education, and rule changes. One challenge for wearable systems is their ability to discriminate head impacts from recorded spurious signals. This study describes the development and evaluation of a head impact detection system consisting of a mouthguard sensor and machine learning model for distinguishing head impacts from spurious events in football games. Twenty-one collegiate football athletes participating in 11 games during the 2018 and 2019 seasons wore a custom-fit mouthguard instrumented with linear and angular accelerometers to collect kinematic data. Video was reviewed to classify sensor events, collected from instrumented players that sustained head impacts, as head impacts or spurious events. Data from 2018 games were used to train the ML model to classify head impacts using kinematic data features (127 head impacts; 305 non-head impacts). Performance of the mouthguard sensor and ML model were evaluated using an independent test dataset of 3 games from 2019 (58 head impacts; 74 non-head impacts). Based on the test dataset results, the mouthguard sensor alone detected 81.6% of video-confirmed head impacts while the ML classifier provided 98.3% precision and 100% recall, resulting in an overall head impact detection system that achieved 98.3% precision and 81.6% recall.
IntroductionIn concussion, clinical and physiological recovery are increasingly recognized as diverging definitions. This study investigated whether central microglial activation persisted in participants with concussion after receiving an unrestricted return-to-play (uRTP) designation using [18F]DPA-714 PET, an in vivo marker of microglia activation.MethodsEight (5 M, 3 F) current athletes with concussion (Group 1) and 10 (5 M, 5 F) healthy collegiate students (Group 2) were enrolled. Group 1 completed a pre-injury (Visit1) screen, follow-up Visit2 within 24 h of a concussion diagnosis, and Visit3 at the time of uRTP. Healthy participants only completed assessments at Visit2 and Visit3. At Visit2, all participants completed a multidimensional battery of tests followed by a blood draw to determine genotype and study inclusion. At Visit3, participants completed a clinical battery of tests, brain MRI, and brain PET; no imaging tests were performed outside of Visit3.ResultsFor Group 1, significant differences were observed between Visits 1 and 2 (p < 0.05) in ImPACT, SCAT5 and SOT performance, but not between Visit1 and Visit3 for standard clinical measures (all p > 0.05), reflecting clinical recovery. Despite achieving clinical recovery, PET imaging at Visit3 revealed consistently higher [18F]DPA-714 tracer distribution volume (VT) of Group 1 compared to Group 2 in 10 brain regions (p < 0.001) analyzed from 164 regions of the whole brain, most notably within the limbic system, dorsal striatum, and medial temporal lobe. No notable differences were observed between clinical measures and VT between Group 1 and Group 2 at Visit3.DiscussionOur study is the first to demonstrate persisting microglial activation in active collegiate athletes who were diagnosed with a sport concussion and cleared for uRTP based on a clinical recovery.
An 18-year-old male hurdler reported to preparticipation physicals, with a history of anterior cruciate ligament, lateral collateral ligament, and posterior cruciate ligament sprain; medial meniscocapsular sprain; and biceps femoris tendon avulsion. The patient received full clearance from his surgeon, despite functional deficits. Rehabilitation and return-to-play decision making included analysis of patient-reported outcome scores and tests of symmetry and neuromuscular control. After graduated intervention and multiple batteries of assessments, the patient was allowed to return to full participation. The nature of this sport and the time between surgery and the intervention made thorough evaluation of function and graduated progression a necessity.
ObjectivesTo assess the effects of a 4-week randomised controlled trial comparing an outdoor gait-training programme to reduce contact time in conjunction with home exercises (contact time gait-training feedback with home exercises (FBHE)) to home exercises (HEs) alone for runners with exercise-related lower leg pain on sensor-derived biomechanics and patient-reported outcomes.DesignRandomised controlled trial.SettingLaboratory and field-based study.Participants20 runners with exercise-related lower leg pain were randomly allocated into FBHE (4 male (M), 6 female (F), 23±4 years, 22.0±4.3 kg/m2) or HE groups (3 M, 7 F, 25±5 years, 23.6±3.9 kg/m2).InterventionsBoth groups completed eight sessions of HEs over 4 weeks. The FBHE group received vibrotactile feedback through wearable sensors to reduce contact time during outdoor running.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and outdoor gait assessments were conducted for both groups at baseline and 4 weeks. PROMs were repeated at 6 weeks, and feedback retention was assessed at 6 weeks for the FBHE group. Repeated measures analyses of variance were used to assess the influence of group and timepoint on primary outcomes.ResultsThe FBHE group reported increased function and recovery on PROMs beyond the HE group at 6 weeks (p<0.001). There was a significant group by time interaction for Global Rating of Change (p=0.004) and contact time (p=0.002); the FBHE group reported greater subjective improvement and reduced contact time at 4 and 6 weeks compared with the HE group and compared with baseline. The FBHE group had increased cadence (mean difference: 7 steps/min, p=0.01) at 4 weeks during outdoor running compared with baseline.ConclusionFBHE was more effective than HE alone for runners with exercise-related lower leg pain, manifested with improved PROMs, reduced contact time and increased cadence.Trial registration numberNCT04270565.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.