English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background: Emerging evidence suggests neurophysiological deficits, such as visual motor coordination (VMC), may persist beyond clinical concussion recovery. Instrumented measurement of upper-limb VMC is critical for neurological evaluation post-concussion and may identify persistent deficits further elucidating persistent neurophysiological impairments not detected by the current clinical assessment battery. Aim: The aim of the study was to determine if a VMC test identifies persistent deficits in concussed collegiate student-athletes who have returned to baseline on clinical concussion assessments. Methods: Thirteen recently concussed intercollegiate student-athletes (male: 7, 18.9±0.7 years, 175.5±12.4 cm, 75.5±23.2 kg), and 13 matched control student-athletes (male: 7, 19.3±1.1 years, 173.5±11.9 cm, 75.8±19.9 kg) completed two testing sessions (T1: <48 h after clinical recovery; T2: 30 days post-concussion) on a visual motor exam. The outcome measures were A* Average score (average number of lights hit on A* exam), simple visual reaction time (SVRT)-RT, and movement time (SVRT-MT) on the Dynavision D2. The dependent variables were compared with a 2 (group) × 2 (time) repeated measures ANOVAs. Results: There was no group interaction in A* average score (F(1,24)=0.036, P=0.849), SVRT-RT (F(1,22)=0.319, P=0.575), and SVRT-MT (F(1,22)=1.179, P=0.188). There was a main effect for time on A* average score (T1: 76.3±10.4 hits; T2: 82.7±11.2 hits; F(1,24)=38.1, P≤0.001) and SVRT-RT (T1: 0.31±0.04; T2: 0.29±0.04 s; F(1,22)=4.9, P=0.039). There was no main effect for SVRT-MT. There were no group differences at either time point. Conclusions: Among recently concussed collegiate student-athletes, no persistent deficits were identified in VMC beyond clinical recovery when assessed by Dynavision D2. This VMC exam may not provide a useful means of tracking recovery following concussion likely due to a substantial practice effect. Relevance for patients: While post-concussion neurophysiological deficits persist beyond clinical recovery, the laboratory based VMC assessment herein did not identify deficits at critical post-concussion time points. Therefore, other clinically translatable VMC assessments should be further investigated.

The use of a visual motor test to identify lingering deficits in concussed collegiate athletes