Abstract
Objective: To assess the feasibility and accuracy of telemedical concussion evaluations (teleconcussion) for real-time athletic sideline assessment of concussion, as such assessment may address the gap in access some populations of athletes have to providers with expertise in concussion evaluation.
Methods: A cohort of 11 consecutive male collegiate football players with suspected concussion was assessed using Standardized Assessment of Concussion (SAC), King-Devick test (K-D), and modified Balance Error Scoring System (mBESS). A remote neurologist assessed each athlete using a telemedicine robot with real-time, 2-way audiovisual capabilities, while a sideline provider performed a simultaneous face-to-face assessment. After the assessment, a remove-from-play (RFP) determination was made. The remote and the face-to-face providers were blinded to each other’s examination findings and RFP decision until the end of the assessment.
Results: The teleconcussion and face-to-face SAC were in agreement 100% of the time (6/6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 54%–100%). The mean (SD) difference between remote and sideline K-D times was 0.7 (1.4) seconds. Remote and sideline K-D times were within a 3-second difference 100% of the time (11/11; 95% CI 72%–100%). Remote and sideline mBESS scores were within 3 points 100% of the time (6/6; 95% CI 54%–100%). RFP decisions were in agreement 100% of the time (11/11; 95% CI 72%–100%).
Conclusions: The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of teleconcussion for sideline concussion assessments. These data suggest a high level of agreement between remote and face-to-face providers with regard to examination findings and RFP determinations.
GLOSSARY
- CI=
- confidence interval;
- K-D=
- King-Devick test;
- mBESS=
- modified Balance Error Scoring System;
- RFP=
- remove-from-play;
- SAC=
- Standardized Assessment of Concussion;
- TBI=
- traumatic brain injury
Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.
- Received July 17, 2016.
- Accepted in final form January 24, 2017.
- © 2017 American Academy of Neurology
Disputes & Debates: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.