Kroshus E, Cameron KL, Coatsworth JD, D'Lauro C, Kim NJ, Lee KM, Register-Mihalik J, Milroy JJ, Roetert EP, Schmidt JD, Silverman RD, Warmath D, Wayment HA, Hainline B. 20(3). 88 - 95. (Journal Article)
Abstract
Early disclosure of possible concussive symptoms has the potential to improve concussion-related clinical outcomes. The objective of the present consensus process was to provide useful and feasible recommendations for collegiate athletic departments and military service academy leaders about how to increase concussion symptom disclosure in their setting. Consensus was obtained using a modified Delphi process. Participants in the consensus process were grant awardees from the National Collegiate Athletic Association and Department of Defense Mind Matters Research & Education Grand Challenge and a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders from collegiate athletics and military service academies. The process included a combination of in-person meetings and anonymous online voting on iteratively modified recommendations for approaches to improve concussion symptom disclosure. Recommendations were rated in terms of their utility and feasibility in collegiate athletic and MSA settings with a priori thresholds for retaining, discarding, and revising statements. A total of 17 recommendations met thresholds for utility and feasibility and are grouped for discussion in five domains: (1) content of concussion education for athletes and MSA cadets, (2) dissemination and implementation of concussion education for athletes and military service academy cadets, (3) other stakeholder concussion education, (4) team and unit-level processes, and (5) organizational processes. Collectively, these recommendations provide a path forward for athletics departments and military service academies in terms of the behavioral health supports and institutional processes that are needed to increase early and honest disclosure of concussion symptoms and ultimately to improve clinical care outcomes.
Keywords: concussion; athletics departments; military service academies; clinical care outcomes
Knapik JJ, Hoedebecke BL, Mitchener TA. 20(3). 114 - 116. (Journal Article)
Abstract
This is second of a two-part series on the history and effectiveness of mouthguards (MGs) for protection from orofacial injuries. MGs are hypothesized to reduce orofacial injuries by separating the upper and lower dentation, preventing tooth fractures, redistributing and absorbing the force of direct blows to the mouth, and separating teeth from soft tissue which helps prevent lacerations and bruises. The single study on MG use in military training found that when boil-and-bite MGs were required for four training activities, orofacial injury rates were reduced 56% compared with when MGs were required for just one training activity. A recent systematic review on the effectiveness of MGs for prevention of orofacial injuries included 23 studies involving MG users and nonusers and a wide variety of sports. For cohort studies that directly collected injury data, the risk of an orofacial injury was 2.33 times higher among MG nonusers (95% confidence interval, 1.59-3.44). More well-designed studies are needed on the effectiveness of MGs during military training. Despite some methodological limitations, the current data suggest that MGs can substantially reduce the risk of orofacial injuries in sport activities. MGs should be used in activities where there is a significant risk of orofacial injuries.
Keywords: mouthguards; orofacial injury; sports injuries; oral health