Cited by 71Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchSports injuries and preventionTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances

Acute motor, neurocognitive and neurophysiological change following concussion injury in Australian amateur football. A prospective multimodal investigation

Open access
Pearce, Alan J., Hoy, Kate, Rogers, Mark A., Corp, Daniel T., Davies, Charlotte B., Maller, Jerome J., Fitzgerald, Paul B.·2015·Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport

Abstract

Objectives This multimodal study investigated the motor, neurocognitive and neurophysiological responses following a sports related concussion injury in the acute-phase (up to 10 days) in sub-elite Australian football players. Design Between-group, repeated measures. Methods Over the course of one season (six months), 43 male players from one football club (25.1 ± 4.5 years) were assessed for fine motor dexterity, visuomotor reaction time, implicit learning and attention. Motor cortex excitability and inhibition were assessed using transcranial magnetic stimulation. Results Of the 43 players, eight suffered concussion injuries, and were compared to 15 non-concussed players (active control) who returned for follow up testing. Post-concussion assessments using the aforementioned tests were carried out at 48 and 96 h, and 10 days. Compared to the non-concussed players, those who suffered concussion showed slowed fine dexterity (P = 0.02), response (P = 0.02) and movement times (P = 0.01) 48 h post-concussion. Similarly, attentional performance was reduced in the concussed group at all time points (48 h: P < 0.01; 96 h: P < 0.01; and 10 days: P = 0.02) post-concussion. TMS revealed significantly increased corticospinal inhibition at 48 (P = 0.04) and 96 h post concussion (P = 0.02) with significant correlations between increased corticospinal inhibition and response (r = 0.48; P < 0.01), movement time (r = 0.42; P = 0.02), and attention performance (r = 0.44; P = 0.01). Conclusions This study has demonstrated that acutely concussed Australian football players show abnormalities in motor, cognitive and neurophysiological measures with variable rates of recovery. These findings suggest that measuring the recovery of concussed athletes should incorporate a range of testing modalities rather than relying on one area of measurement in determining return to play.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsams.2014.07.010

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • These changes have been observed across broad post-injury timeframes ranging from days to decades and are associated with deficits in motor learning and performance.

    “These changes have been observed across broad post-injury timeframes ranging from days (Pearce et al. 2015) to decades (De Beaumont et al. 2009, Pearce et al. 2014), and have been associated with deficits in motor learning and performance (De Beaumont et al. 2012).”
  • These changes have been observed across broad post-injury timeframes ranging from days to decades and are associated with deficits in motor learning and performance.

    “These changes have been observed across broad post-injury timeframes ranging from days (Pearce et al. 2015) to decades (De Beaumont et al. 2009, Pearce et al. 2014), and have been associated with deficits in motor learning and performance (De Beaumont et al. 2012).”
  • Numerous studies highlight alterations in motor cortical neurophysiology after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI).

    “Numerous studies highlight alterations in motor cortical neurophysiology after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pearce, A. J., Hoy, K., Rogers, M. A., Corp, D. T., Davies, C. B., Maller, J. J., & Fitzgerald, P. B.
Affiliations
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • The Alfred Hospital (AU)
Corresponding author
Pearce, Alan J.
Venue
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-09
Volume
18
Issue
5
Pages
500-506
ISSN
1440-2440 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2130488565
Cited by
71
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 1
FWCI
4.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of science and medicine in sport (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
  • Deakin Research Online (Deakin University) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Health and Medical Research Council (606907)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports injuries and prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Keywords
sports-related concussion, Australian football, motor performance, neurocognitive function, corticospinal inhibition, motor cortex excitability, fine motor dexterity, visuomotor reaction time, attention, implicit learning, return to sport, concussion recovery
MeSH terms
Return to Sport, Adult, Attention, Australia, Brain Concussion, Football, Humans, Learning, Male, Prospective Studies, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Case-Control Studies, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review