Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/a-1533-1700
Accuracy of Components of the SCAT5 and ChildSCAT5 to Identify Children with Concussion
Funding source: Franz Babl has been in part funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council Practitioner Fellowship, Canberra, Australia, and the Royal Children’s Hospital Foundation, Melbourne, Australia.Conflict of InterestDr. Davis is an honorary member of the AFL Concussion Working Group Scientific Committee, and has attended meetings organised by sporting organisations including the NFL, NRL, IIHF and FIFA; however has not received any payment, research funding, or other monies from these groups other than for travel costs; Dr. Davis is also a shareholder in 9 Lives. All other authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article to disclose. Ethical approval: This study has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Royal Children’s Hospital Melbourne.
Abstract
The Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 5th Edition (SCAT5) is a standardized measure of concussion. In this prospective observational study, the ability of the SCAT5 and ChildSCAT5 to differentiate between children with and without a concussion was examined. Concussed children (n=91) and controls (n=106) were recruited from an emergency department in three equal-sized age bands (5–8/9–12/13–16 years). Analysis of covariance models (adjusting for participant age) were used to analyze group differences on components of the SCAT5. On the SCAT5 and ChildSCAT5, respectively, youth with concussion reported a greater number (d=1.47; d=0.52) and severity (d=1.27; d=0.72) of symptoms than controls (all p<0.001). ChildSCAT5 parent-rated number (d=0.98) and severity (d=1.04) of symptoms were greater for the concussion group (all p<0.001). Acceptable levels of between-group discrimination were identified for SCAT5 symptom number (AUC=0.86) and severity (AUC=0.84) and ChildSCAT5 parent-rated symptom number (AUC=0.76) and severity (AUC=0.78). Our findings support the utility of the SCAT5 and ChildSCAT5 to accurately distinguish between children with and without a concussion.
Publication History
Received: 14 February 2021
Accepted: 07 June 2021
Article published online:
16 August 2021
© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References
- 1 McCrory P, Meeuwisse W, Dvorak J. et al. Consensus statement on concussion in sport—the 5th international conference on concussion in sport held in Berlin, October 2016. Br J Sports Med 2017; 51: 838-847
- 2 Meehan WP, Mannix R. Pediatric concussions in United States emergency departments in the years 2002–2006. J Pediatr 2010; 157: 889-893
- 3 Arbogast KB, Curry AE, Pfeiffer MR. et al. Point of health care entry for youth with concussion within a large pediatric care network. JAMA Pediatr 2016; 170: e160294
- 4 Davis GA, Anderson V, Babl FE. et al. What is the difference in concussion management in children as compared with adults? A systematic review. Br J Sports Med 2017; 51: 949-957
- 5 Echemendia RJ, Meeuwisse W, McCrory P. et al. The sport concussion assessment tool 5th edition (SCAT5): background and rationale. Br J Sports Med 2017; 51: 848-850
- 6 Feddermann-Demont N, Echemendia RJ, Schneider KJ. et al. What domains of clinical function should be assessed after sport-related concussion? A systematic review. Br J Sports Med 2017; 51: 903-918
- 7 Davis GA, Purcell L, Schneider KJ. et al. The child sport concussion assessment tool 5th edition (child scat5): Background and rationale. Br J Sports Med 2017; 51: 859-861
- 8 Lumba-Brown A, Ghajar J, Cornwell J. et al. Representation of concussion subtypes in common postconcussion symptom-rating scales. Concussion 2019; 4: CNC65
- 9 Iverson GL. Network analysis and precision rehabilitation for the post-concussion syndrome. Front Neurol 2019; 10: 489
- 10 Bruce JM, Thelen J, Meeuwisse W. et al. Use of the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 5 (SCAT5) in professional hockey, part 2: which components differentiate concussed and non-concussed players?. Br J Sports Med 2020;
- 11 Babl FE, Dionisio D, Davenport L. et al. Accuracy of components of SCAT to identify children with concussion. Pediatrics 2017; 140: e20163258
- 12 Downey RI, Hutchison MG, Comper P. Determining sensitivity and specificity of the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 3 (SCAT3) components in university athletes. Brain Inj 2018; 32: 1345-1352
- 13 Nelson LD, Loman MM, LaRoche AA. et al. Baseline performance and psychometric properties of the Child Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 3 (Child-SCAT3) in 5- to 13-year-old athletes. Clin J Sport Med 2017; 27: 381-387
- 14 Yengo-Kahn AM, Hale AT, Zalneraitis BH. et al. The Sport Concussion Assessment Tool: a systematic review. Neurosurg Focus 2016; 40: E6
- 15 Harriss DJ, MacSween A, Atkinson G. Ethical standards in sport and exercise science research: 2020 update. Int J Sports Med 2019; 40: 813-817
- 16 Ayr LK, Yeates KO, Taylor HG. et al. Dimensions of postconcussive symptoms in children with mild traumatic brain injuries. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2009; 15: 19-30
- 17 Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant RX. Applied Logistic Regression. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2013
- 18 Shapiro JS, Hearps SJC, Rausa VC. et al. Validation of the SCAT5 and Child SCAT5 word-list memory task. J Neurotrauma 2021;
- 19 Norheim N, Kissinger-Knox A, Cheatham M. et al. Performance of college athletes on the 10-item word list of SCAT5. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med 2018; 4: e000412