Diagnostic Utility of New SCAT5 Neurological Screen Sub-tests.
Brain Concussion
Diagnostic accuracy
Rugby
SCAT5
Screening
Journal
Sports medicine - open
ISSN: 2199-1170
Titre abrégé: Sports Med Open
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101662568
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Feb 2021
15 Feb 2021
Historique:
received:
24
06
2020
accepted:
25
01
2021
entrez:
15
2
2021
pubmed:
16
2
2021
medline:
16
2
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The Sports Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT) is recommended to screen for concussion following head impact events in elite sport. The most recent 5th edition (SCAT5) included a 'rapid neurological screen' which introduced new subtests examining comprehension, passive neck movement, and diplopia. This study evaluated the additional diagnostic value of these new subtests. A prospective cohort study was performed in the Pro14 elite Rugby Union competition between September 2018 and January 2020. The SCAT5 was administered by the team doctor to players undergoing off-field screening for concussion during a medical room assessment. Sensitivity, specificity, false negatives, and positives were examined for SCAT5 comprehension, passive neck movement, and diplopia subtests. The reference standard was a final diagnosis of concussion, established by serial standardised clinical assessments over 48 h. Ninety-three players undergoing off-field screening for concussion were included. Sensitivity and specificity of the comprehension, passive neck movement, and diplopia subtests were 0, 8, 5% and 0, 91, 97%, respectively (concussion prevalence 63%). No players had any abnormality in comprehension. No players had abnormal passive neck movement or diplopia in the absence of abnormalities in other SCAT5 sub-components. The new SCAT5 neurological screen subtests are normal in the majority of players undergoing off-field concussion screening and appear to lack diagnostic utility over and above other SCAT5 subtests.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The Sports Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT) is recommended to screen for concussion following head impact events in elite sport. The most recent 5th edition (SCAT5) included a 'rapid neurological screen' which introduced new subtests examining comprehension, passive neck movement, and diplopia. This study evaluated the additional diagnostic value of these new subtests.
METHODS
METHODS
A prospective cohort study was performed in the Pro14 elite Rugby Union competition between September 2018 and January 2020. The SCAT5 was administered by the team doctor to players undergoing off-field screening for concussion during a medical room assessment. Sensitivity, specificity, false negatives, and positives were examined for SCAT5 comprehension, passive neck movement, and diplopia subtests. The reference standard was a final diagnosis of concussion, established by serial standardised clinical assessments over 48 h.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Ninety-three players undergoing off-field screening for concussion were included. Sensitivity and specificity of the comprehension, passive neck movement, and diplopia subtests were 0, 8, 5% and 0, 91, 97%, respectively (concussion prevalence 63%). No players had any abnormality in comprehension. No players had abnormal passive neck movement or diplopia in the absence of abnormalities in other SCAT5 sub-components.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The new SCAT5 neurological screen subtests are normal in the majority of players undergoing off-field concussion screening and appear to lack diagnostic utility over and above other SCAT5 subtests.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33587231
doi: 10.1186/s40798-021-00303-z
pii: 10.1186/s40798-021-00303-z
pmc: PMC7884490
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
14Références
Br J Sports Med. 2005 Apr;39(4):196-204
pubmed: 15793085
J Athl Train. 2016 Dec;51(12):1037-1044
pubmed: 27835042
Br J Sports Med. 2013 Apr;47(5):289-93
pubmed: 23479486
Br J Sports Med. 2017 Jun;51(11):848-850
pubmed: 28446453
Br J Sports Med. 2017 Jun;51(11):888-894
pubmed: 28270437
Sports Med Open. 2020 Jan 9;6(1):2
pubmed: 31919687
Clin J Sport Med. 2003 Jan;13(1):28-32
pubmed: 12544161
Phys Sportsmed. 2009 Jun;37(2):141-59
pubmed: 20048521
Lancet Neurol. 2014 Oct;13(10):1006-16
pubmed: 25231523
Br J Sports Med. 2013 Jan;47(1):15-26
pubmed: 23243113