Baseline Performance of NCAA Athletes on a Concussion Assessment Battery: A Report from the CARE Consortium

Sports Med -


Katz, B. P., M. Kudela, J. Harezlak, M. McCrea, T. McAllister, S. P. Broglio and C. C. Investigators.



BACKGROUND: Sport-related concussion and repetitive head impact exposure in contact sports continue to receive increased attention in public and medical spheres. The Concussion Assessment, Research and Education (CARE) Consortium, a multicenter cooperative, was established to study the natural history of concussion in National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) collegiate student-athletes across 29 colleges and universities in the United States. The purpose of this investigation is to provide normative data from the CARE Consortium and evaluate for differences between sport categories. METHODS: NCAA student-athletes were evaluated annually for general demographics and sport-specific characteristics before the start of the competitive season. We collected demographic and medical history information and evaluated each student-athlete’s neurocognitive function, neurological status, postural stability, and self-reported symptoms. Sports were categorized by the amount of contact typically associated with the sport (i.e., contact, limited contact, non-contact). Comparisons between the three sport categories for the evaluated variables were made using linear or zero inflated negative binomial regression models adjusted for gender, concussion history, and household income. RESULTS: Over a 2-year period (August 2014-July 2016), 15,681 NCAA athletes completed preseason evaluations. Overall, 53% of the athletes were in the contact sport group, 31% were in the limited contact group and 17% were in the non-contact group. After adjusting for covariates, there were statistically significant differences found between athlete groups, although the differences and effect sizes were small and not clinically significant. The contact sport group had better scores on Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment Testing (ImPACT((R))) visual and verbal memory, Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT) symptom checklist, and Brief Symptom Inventory-18 (BSI-18), but slower ImPACT reaction time and worse scores on Standardized Assessment of Concussion (SAC). Further, the data indicate that some ImPACT score distributions were noticeably different from those presented in the technical manual. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, racially and socio-economically diverse cohort of male and female college athletes, we found no evidence that student-athletes participating in contact sports have clinically meaningful deficits in pre-season cognitive and balance testing. They also did not report significantly more symptoms of psychological distress when compared with student-athletes in non-contact or limited contact sports. In addition, the data suggest potential limitations when using published ImPACT norms when evaluating injured athletes.

Links to full article: