OBJECTIVE Concussion is a growing public health concern given the large number of youth and collegiate athletes participating in collision sports. Sport-related concussions can have an adverse impact on student-athletes' health and academic performance. Athletic programs within academic organizations are motivated to employ the most effective and efficient diagnostic and recovery procedures to minimize the duration and impact of these symptoms on student-athletes' functioning. The present study sought to further our understanding regarding the value and frequency of conducting baseline assessments when evaluating sport-related concussions. METHOD A total of 41 athletes (24 men, 17 women) between the ages of 18 and 22 were evaluated following suspected concussive injury between 2015 and 2018. Post-injury test results were compared to baselines that had been collected either 1 or 2 years prior, and to normative data, to determine consistency in diagnostic outcomes. RESULTS Baseline test/retest reliability using Pearson's bivariate correlations revealed modest correlations on measures of verbal and visual memory (0.437-0.569) and very strong correlations on measures of reaction time and visual-motor speed (0.811-0.821). Meanwhile, minimal if any differences in clinical decision-making regarding the diagnostic outcome was observed when comparing post-injury test results to different baselines and to normative data. CONCLUSIONS Findings indicate that yearly baseline testing may not improve diagnostic accuracy, and in many cases, normative data may be adequate for decision-making. Additional research should evaluate the potential benefit of baseline testing in return-to-play decision-making among broader athletic populations.

中文翻译：

---

基线测试的频率是否会影响大学运动员的脑震荡诊断决策？

目的 鉴于大量青少年和大学运动员参加碰撞运动，脑震荡已成为一个日益严重的公共卫生问题。与运动相关的脑震荡会对学生运动员的健康和学业成绩产生不利影响。学术组织内的运动项目致力于采用最有效和高效的诊断和恢复程序，以尽量减少这些症状的持续时间和对学生运动员功能的影响。本研究旨在进一步了解在评估运动相关脑震荡时进行基线评估的价值和频率。方法 2015 年至 2018 年间，共有 41 名年龄在 18 岁至 22 岁之间的运动员（24 名男性，17 名女性）在疑似脑震荡受伤后接受了评估。将受伤后的测试结果与 1 或 2 年前收集的基线进行比较，以及规范数据，以确定诊断结果的一致性。结果 使用 Pearson 双变量相关性的基线测试/重测可靠性显示，言语和视觉记忆测量值具有适度的相关性 (0.437-0.569)，而反应时间和视觉运动速度测量值则具有非常强的相关性 (0.811-0.821)。同时，当将损伤后测试结果与不同基线和规范数据进行比较时，观察到有关诊断结果的临床决策存在最小差异（如果有的话）。结论 研究结果表明，每年的基线测试可能不会提高诊断准确性，并且在许多情况下，规范数据可能足以用于决策。其他研究应该评估基线测试在更广泛的运动人群中重返比赛决策中的潜在好处。