Systematic review explores factors influencing athlete retirement post-concussion, indicating minimal evidence for specific guidelines.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the scientific literature regarding factors to consider when providing advice or guidance to athletes about retirement from contact or collision sport following sport-related concussion (SRC), and to define contraindications to children/adolescent athletes entering or continuing with contact or collision sports after SRC. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, SPORTSDiscus, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched systematically. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were included if they were (1) original research, (2) reported on SRC as the primary source of injury, (3) evaluated the history, clinical assessment and/or investigation of findings that may preclude participation in sport and (4) evaluated mood disturbance and/or neurocognitive deficits, evidence of structural brain injury or risk factors for increased risk of subsequent SRC or prolonged recovery. RESULTS: Of 4355 articles identified, 93 met the inclusion criteria. None of the included articles directly examined retirement and/or discontinuation from contact or collision sport. Included studies examined factors associated with increased risk of recurrent SRC or prolonged recovery following SRC. In general, these were low-quality cohort studies with heterogeneous results and moderate risk of bias. Higher number and/or severity of symptoms at presentation, sleep disturbance and symptom reproduction with Vestibular Ocular Motor Screen testing were associated with prolonged recovery and history of previous concussion was associated with a risk of further SRC. CONCLUSION: No evidence was identified to support the inclusion of any patient-specific, injury-specific or other factors (eg, imaging findings) as absolute indications for retirement or discontinued participation in contact or collision sport following SRC. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022155121.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Makdissi et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: