|
|
Post by coachdawhip on Dec 22, 2013 21:15:52 GMT -6
The only issue here is that according to those making brain injury/brain trauma their life's work (like those at the CSTE at Boston U) most doctors are WOEFULLY behind on this particular medical issue. We have been through this on other threads. There are MILLIONS of players who played the game with incredibly worse helmets, taught to tackle with their head, and kept playing with repeated with concussions and while they concussions that are completely fine and are 60, 70, 80 years old. They are our fathers, uncles, former coaches, people we go to church with. I am not saying that CSTE is not real, but I really think we are now at a point in time that we have effectively eliminated it except for rare cases. I am talking about todays 18 year olds. I just don't think that a kid that plays now and then college and then in the NFL is really at high risk for CSTE anymore. Why? Because we have tremendously better helmets. We don't teach tackling with our head anymore. And we are not stupid enough to play someone who really has a concussion. Players know it, coaches know it, trainers know it, doctors know it, and most importantly parents know it. And we will pull out players who have symptoms and get them checked. But we have swung this thing so far the other way it is getting stupid. 17 concussions in one year? Really? Really? From what the research says coach 17 is about average and we use the impact testing now, which I don't like but hey, I'm not the big boss, we had about 11 this year. |
|
|
|
Post by veerman on Dec 22, 2013 21:22:09 GMT -6
I agree, concussions have become norm cool thing if you want to say. Plus it's the ease get out card if things are not going good, cause who's going to second guess a concussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Dec 22, 2013 22:47:23 GMT -6
I agree, concussions have become norm cool thing if you want to say. Plus it's the ease get out card if things are not going good, cause who's going to second guess a concussion. You don't actually believe that do you? |
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 23, 2013 9:57:00 GMT -6
We have been through this on other threads. There are MILLIONS of players who played the game with incredibly worse helmets, taught to tackle with their head, and kept playing with repeated with concussions and while they concussions that are completely fine and are 60, 70, 80 years old. They are our fathers, uncles, former coaches, people we go to church with. I am not saying that CSTE is not real, but I really think we are now at a point in time that we have effectively eliminated it except for rare cases. I am talking about todays 18 year olds. I just don't think that a kid that plays now and then college and then in the NFL is really at high risk for CSTE anymore. Why? Because we have tremendously better helmets. We don't teach tackling with our head anymore. And we are not stupid enough to play someone who really has a concussion. Players know it, coaches know it, trainers know it, doctors know it, and most importantly parents know it. And we will pull out players who have symptoms and get them checked. But we have swung this thing so far the other way it is getting stupid. 17 concussions in one year? Really? Really? From what the research says coach 17 is about average and we use the impact testing now, which I don't like but hey, I'm not the big boss, we had about 11 this year. If 17 real concussions is the average per team per season, then football is in trouble and maybe should be. I just ABSOLUTELY REFUSE TO BELIEVE that 17 is the average per team per season. We have gone way overboard on this issue. I don't think that our entire league had 17 diagnosed concussion this year. We had one kid, one kid that was even remotely close to a concussion. He got caught between two players and hit in the head and was laying on the field. We went to check on him and he actually answered all the questions fine. I pulled him out and would not even think of putting him back in. He went to the doctor Monday and was fine. They just told us to hold him out of contact until re-evaluated as a precaution. He was cleared to do other drills. He went back for evaluation on Friday morning and was cleared to play. He was completely fine and never had any problems the rest of the season and was not diagnosed with a concussion. I would have guessed when the hit occurred that he was knocked out and that he would be out 2 to 6 weeks. I would have been fine with that. The last thing I want to do is play someone with a concussion. If a kid takes a big hit or gets up a slow, we will pull him out and let the trainer ask him so questions. We also always have a doctor at games. If he isn't sure, we hold him out until he is sure or he doesn't play. I get the severity of this issue. I just do not agree that 17 concussions is the average per team per season. What are college and NFL teams averaging? |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Dec 23, 2013 10:13:24 GMT -6
We have a very good trainer. Smart, experienced, conscientious. Does all testing, follows protocols religiously. I trust her implicitly.
We haven't had 17 concussions total (all levels combined) in four years at school.
If a team has 17 or even 14 concussions in one year either the players are using improper techniques or helmets have not been fitted properly, or both.
We use Riddell Revolution helmets, FWIW. |
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Dec 23, 2013 11:30:24 GMT -6
Guys go look at the data the average is 10%. We measured each impact this year it was measured and recorded for all kids each day. We had a certified therapist on site at all times.
To say things like we are over diagnosing concusions is dead wrong. Much of what you guys are saying is anecdotal not data informed.
Our data showed our Ridell speeds had the highest level of "impacts " VS the Schutt & Rawlings helmets had the lowest impacts.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Dec 23, 2013 11:45:17 GMT -6
falcon, are you using terms "impacts" and "concussions" synonymously?
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Dec 23, 2013 11:56:21 GMT -6
Our data showed our Ridell speeds had the highest level of "impacts " VS the Schutt & Rawlings helmets had the lowest impacts.
What was the distribution of helmets by positions, e.g. how many linemen wore Riddells? Schutts? Rawlings? How many Backs? etc.
What was the percentage of "impacts" by positions?
When you say "highest level" do you mean most total impacts, are "hardest" impacts?
|
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Dec 23, 2013 17:16:43 GMT -6
No no we measured each impact using an in helmet sensor that sends data in the force of any impact from dropping the helmet to contact to in iPad. If an athlete registers a higher force impact they are assessed by a certified athletic therapist using the iPad software. That assessment is then compared to their baseline automatically with the software. A concusion was any assessment where a student was pulled from action and was unable to return because they could not pass the baseline assessment.
Impacts do not = concussions.
Our biggest hits did not = concussions
The breakdown roughly is:
1 speed on a lineman (the rest in a mix of schutt & Rawlings )
The rest of our speeds were on DB's rb's Rec. We have more schutt & Rawlings hats on guys than we do speeds.
Our program has 100 students in it from G10-12 all in proper fitted gear, all with baseline data, all with sensors in helmets.
I agree with you guys about the way practices are run this study has caused us to re-evaluate the way we practice. We teach the heads up chest to chest stuff so that end is taken care of as well
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Dec 23, 2013 18:11:13 GMT -6
No no we measured each impact using an in helmet sensor that sends data in the force of any impact from dropping the helmet to contact to in iPad. If an athlete registers a higher force impact they are assessed by a certified athletic therapist using the iPad software. That assessment is then compared to their baseline automatically with the software. A concusion was any assessment where a student was pulled from action and was unable to return because they could not pass the baseline assessment. Impacts do not = concussions. Our biggest hits did not = concussions The breakdown roughly is: 1 speed on a lineman (the rest in a mix of schutt & Rawlings ) The rest of our speeds were on DB's rb's Rec. We have more schutt & Rawlings hats on guys than we do speeds. Our program has 100 students in it from G10-12 all in proper fitted gear, all with baseline data, all with sensors in helmets. I agree with you guys about the way practices are run this study has caused us to re-evaluate the way we practice. We teach the heads up chest to chest stuff so that end is taken care of as well
It would stand to reason then that there would be more "impacts" on players wearing "speeds" since those are the ones who have the ball and thus are targets, or are players making contact with ball carrier at end of play.
So your data about Riddell helmets having more "impacts" may not really prove anything about which helmets are safer.
Secondly, much of the discussion about CTE involving NFL players has been more about repetitive head contact incurred by in-line players (Mike Webster the most prominent example).
Third, and I wish I'd kept the article - after Junior Seau committed suicide there was an article on Slate.com quoting a scientific-medical study that ex-NFL players actually have a longer life expectancy and lower suicide rate than the general public, and suggests that rather than concussions-CTE, a more likely reason for suicides such as Seau and others is that within five years of retirement, two-thirds of former players are bankrupt, have a divorce rate higher than national average, and are dealing with no longer being in the spot light of a star athlete.
In other words, severe depression not caused by brain trauma but rather being ill-equipped to cope with life after football.
|
|
|
|
Post by holmesbend on Dec 23, 2013 22:02:37 GMT -6
We had 14 concussions this year. Trainer. Impact testing (for all athletes), the works. We started doing the impact testing in 2011.
I don't know that we had 4 in the previous four years combined, let alone 14 in one.
Someone else said it, but it's becoming to new wave and going overboard IMO, but who in their right mind is ever going to question a kid complaining of symptoms which are largely all Q and A before being taken to the ER.
Some facts to keep in mind. Of our 14 concussions this year:
- All but ONE of them were freshmen and sophomores.
- We finished 0-11 (largely in part to playing a whole slew of guys that age ^^^..as in starting in upwards of 15 9th/10th at times this year).
- Of the 14 we had....all, but ONE came in a blow out (28 pts or more) in either Varsity or JV.
- We lost four games by a TD or less.....no concussions.
- Only TWO of our concussions came when we were on Defense.
We had two that I know for a fact were legit. One was a sophomore (and, he might not get cleared to ever play again) & the other was a Senior (who also happened to spend about two weeks in the hospital a few years back due to a head trauma he had in a Motor Cross event.
|
|
|
|
Post by scotdaking on Jan 8, 2014 17:27:41 GMT -6
Please scrutinize your concussion testing protocol. We are talking about swelling of the brain. Remember IMPACT is an acronym for a product developed by UPMC hospital in Pittsburgh. The "P" in impact stands for post concussion and does nothing for concussion prevention or baseline testing. The impact test is to be rendered after a suspected concussive event and was designed to determine if concussion symptoms are still present within the athlete. Schools for whatever reason (funding) are mis-using impact attempting to have it double as a concussion test. I am told athletes who knowingly have a concussion can still (beat) score ok on impact. We use a company called Head First PCAT (Pre-Concussion Assessment Testing) with one of the nation's most revered neurosurgeons from Austin, TX on the staff. The company utilizes balance testing, supplements, vision technology and other proprietary tests to baseline test athletes and measure variations in the athlete's equilibrium. Everything starts with a baseline test which ideally should be administered annually at the beginning of each season. Doctors prefer seeing these test results to aid in the diagnosis and like them to go back as far as the youth football days. Some like to talk about concussion testing (NFL, USA Football), others like to throw it a bone using IMPACT (I mean we are talking about the kid's brain after all) and some are ahead of the science and on the field - Head First PCAT.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jan 8, 2014 20:22:21 GMT -6
Please scrutinize your concussion testing protocol. We are talking about swelling of the brain. Remember IMPACT is an acronym for a product developed by UPMC hospital in Pittsburgh. The "P" in impact stands for post concussion and does nothing for concussion prevention or baseline testing. The impact test is to be rendered after a suspected concussive event and was designed to determine if concussion symptoms are still present within the athlete. Schools for whatever reason (funding) are mis-using impact attempting to have it double as a concussion test. I am told athletes who knowingly have a concussion can still (beat) score ok on impact. We use a company called Head First PCAT (Pre-Concussion Assessment Testing) with one of the nation's most revered neurosurgeons from Austin, TX on the staff. The company utilizes balance testing, supplements, vision technology and other proprietary tests to baseline test athletes and measure variations in the athlete's equilibrium. Everything starts with a baseline test which ideally should be administered annually at the beginning of each season. Doctors prefer seeing these test results to aid in the diagnosis and like them to go back as far as the youth football days. Some like to talk about concussion testing (NFL, USA Football), others like to throw it a bone using IMPACT (I mean we are talking about the kid's brain after all) and some are ahead of the science and on the field - Head First PCAT. Whatever happened to taking him to a neurologist and having a mri or brain scan or ct scan or whichever one it is they use? Had a qb get dinged pretty good 10 years ago. Took to emergency room and they called neurologist. They did a test and a brain scan or whatever it was and he was cleared that night. He practiced and played the next week and the rest of the season and was completely fine in school, football, and all his interactions. He missed nothing except a quarter of that game he took the hit. I bet if the same thing happened to a kid nowadays and they didn't do those tests, he would miss four weeks at least. That is 40% of his senior season that he had worked his tail off for. Now if he had a concussion, he should miss as long as it takes. But guess what, he didn't have a concussion. |
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Jan 9, 2014 11:08:30 GMT -6
That was 10 years ago..... my iPhone (brand new out of the box) had a software update less than 24hrs after being released....
What I am getting at is tech, and assessment, practice around this issue has changed dramatically in the last few years.
I think our version / understanding of what was a concussion is now different than what it was in the past at-least that is my experience. I don't think the new assessment tools, tech, is the only solution you had mentioned about teaching the game differently that is as big if not the biggest issue we as coaches face.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jan 9, 2014 13:05:52 GMT -6
That was 10 years ago..... my iPhone (brand new out of the box) had a software update less than 24hrs after being released.... What I am getting at is tech, and assessment, practice around this issue has changed dramatically in the last few years. I think our version / understanding of what was a concussion is now different than what it was in the past at-least that is my experience. I don't think the new assessment tools, tech, is the only solution you had mentioned about teaching the game differently that is as big if not the biggest issue we as coaches face. There is truth to this, but this was a brain scan!!! Nowadays, all I here about is diagnostic tests. There is no way a diagnostic test based on questions given by a trainer can be better than a brain scan looked at by a neurologist. We have no idea if those diagnostic tests are even valid. I for one would bet they are not.
I am all about safety and we will pull a kid out if we suspect at all and get him checked out by a medical doctor. But we have gone dang crazy over concussions and let the pendulum swing way past the correct point. I do not want it ever to go back to lead with your head while it is in a crappy helmet that is 20 years old and has never been re-certified and doesn't even fit. I do not want it to ever go back to you get knocked out three times in a week and you are still playing. Let's just be reasonable.
|
|
|
|
Post by scotdaking on Jan 10, 2014 0:47:10 GMT -6
Perhaps the pendulum did swing but better to error on the side of caution. I have shook the hand of a quadriplegic injured playing QB. I don't imagine too many coaches making more than a couple hospital visits to a player severely injured and still fewer willing to push the wheel chair twice a week. If the brain is swollen and takes another hit that same week it can lead to permanent damage. No, I don't trust anything coming from a trainer administering the IMPACT test. Most team doctors are not neurosurgeons. Many emergency room doctors are not neurosurgeons. For some time, doctors were claiming an MRI wouldn't be useful in examining concussions. Not sure why. Perhaps due to cost. I am not a doctor. It's only recently where an MRI has become part of the diagnosis procedure. The doctor's love the test results coming from Head First PCAT and probably offered advice on how they can be customized to facilitate a diagnosis. Just do the right thing when it comes to the brain.
|
|
|
|
Post by veerman on Jan 10, 2014 9:07:51 GMT -6
I agree that everyone should be safe, but I hate it when people come out and say that this causes this and that....when truth be told their have probably not been any true studies on the brain when it come to concussions, except in the extreme version. Kinda like steroids, (not saying they are good)there have been zero studies on the effects of steroids, except in the extreme cases. ANYTHING in excess is too much. I remember hearing about a woman dying cause she drank too much water to win a PS3, does that mean water is bad NO...As far as the test...its based on how fast you answer questions compared to when you took it when rested. I could not take one hit and just go out and run a mile and my time would enough to probably diagnose me with a concussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jan 10, 2014 13:15:48 GMT -6
I agree that everyone should be safe, but I hate it when people come out and say that this causes this and that....when truth be told their have probably not been any true studies on the brain when it come to concussions, except in the extreme version. Kinda like steroids, (not saying they are good)there have been zero studies on the effects of steroids, except in the extreme cases. ANYTHING in excess is too much. I remember hearing about a woman dying cause she drank too much water to win a PS3, does that mean water is bad NO...As far as the test...its based on how fast you answer questions compared to when you took it when rested. I could not take one hit and just go out and run a mile and my time would enough to probably diagnose me with a concussion. What a great post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Kind of what I have been trying to say. Football in moderation is fine. But if you are going to be an idiot and wear outdated helmet technology, lead with your head, and play football like a madman against the most violent and physical people on the planet for twenty years and keep playing while truly concussed, hey, guess what, that might not be good.
|
|
lb2
Lurker
Posts: 3 
|
Post by lb2 on Jan 15, 2014 11:57:01 GMT -6
Whatever happened to taking him to a neurologist and having a mri or brain scan or ct scan or whichever one it is they use? |
|
lb2
Lurker
Posts: 3
|
Post by lb2 on Jan 15, 2014 12:04:39 GMT -6
Concussions CANNOT be diagnosed by a brain scan. This was the old way, when little was understood about concussions. The idea was to look for more serious issues like bleeding and swelling on the brain.
Concussions are functional problems, and are only diagnosable by functional testing. So the new style testing is actually sensible. And there probably were way more concussions than anyone realized in the past. If brain function is interrupted in any way, that's what you have.
I do think the pendulum has swung way too far though. It is a good thing to hold out kids with concussion symptoms but I think too much is being made of the risks of having a concussion or two playing ball. Like the post earlier said, millions of people played under far less safe conditions and are fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by veerman on Jan 15, 2014 13:23:12 GMT -6
I just have a little problem with the test when, I myself can go out right now run around a little and get good and winded and come back and fail a test that will determine if I have concussion like symptoms....... Also what about kids with IEPs? Dr says hey this kid has a concussion cause he can't read these words clearly and fluently....No kidding?? Could it be cause he reads on a 4th grade level,has dyslexia, and speech impediment?? Like I said, I'm all for our kids safety, but asking a kid to read something or memorize something and have to say it backwards is a little far fetched in diagnosing a concussion, when they may not be able to read unless its in that quiet, no distraction setting.......kinda like the way they take the pre-test in. Im a little biased cause I'm a special ed teacher, and SEVERAL of my kids are on the team.
|
|
|
|
Post by veerman on Jan 15, 2014 13:38:56 GMT -6
OH...and Concussions CAN be diagnose using scans....EEG, Head CT, and MRI are all ways that Dr can diagnose a concussion, and more importantly the severity of the concussion. Now is that the only way, NO, but it is a very effective way to determine a concussion...concussions now have taken on a new definition, just like most things in this country, so your right on it has changed more broad in its diagnose, functional problems are signs, but lots of people may experience a concussion with no functional problems, heck by some standards may not even know they had one. That's why this is a big issue right now, there have been WAY SEVERE cases that Dr's made the assumption that a concussion "may" have cause something to happen, and the media took it an ran, now everyone is trying to figure out what to do. When truth is there probably have been no studies on concussions except the SEVERE OVERKILL and we will error on the side of caution, which is a good thing. Right now at this point that's what we are trying to find out is what is the right spot, and we are starting with safety first (which is GREAT) but must be willing to modify as we learn.
|
|
|
|
Post by kwiknva on Jan 15, 2014 15:03:28 GMT -6
I notice that Schutt and Riddell are made in USA. Was surprised a little to see "made in China" inside the Xenith. Anyone else notice this?
|
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Jan 15, 2014 15:49:22 GMT -6
I just have a little problem with the test when, I myself can go out right now run around a little and get good and winded and come back and fail a test that will determine if I have concussion like symptoms....... Also what about kids with IEPs? Dr says hey this kid has a concussion cause he can't read these words clearly and fluently....No kidding?? Could it be cause he reads on a 4th grade level,has dyslexia, and speech impediment?? Like I said, I'm all for our kids safety, but asking a kid to read something or memorize something and have to say it backwards is a little far fetched in diagnosing a concussion, when they may not be able to read unless its in that quiet, no distraction setting.......kinda like the way they take the pre-test in. Im a little biased cause I'm a special ed teacher, and SEVERAL of my kids are on the team. It is all dependent upon how the test is administered is all. Our test is computer based and based against the athletes baseline data not some standard this out on the clouds. If a player is deemed to have a concussion they sit for 20min and take the test again in a 1on1 setting if he clears he is back in if he doesn't he is still out then they move to a return to play situation where just like you mentioned they need to complete the assessment to return to play in a quiet no distraction area. I agree though the questions / tests need to be more varied to take into account various learning issues. We had a kid this year who took an assessment on a Tues (Mon was a holiday so this was his first day back at school) they asked him what day it was he said Monday... They held him out for 20min.... The athletic therapist did another assessment non computer based and cleared him. I guess my comment on the assessments is: computers and tech are great but let's not forget about the people aspect of things! |
|
lb2
Lurker
Posts: 3
|
Post by lb2 on Jan 15, 2014 17:05:12 GMT -6
OH...and Concussions CAN be diagnose using scans....EEG, Head CT, and MRI are all ways that Dr can diagnose a concussion, and more importantly the severity of the concussion. Now is that the only way, NO, but it is a very effective way to determine a concussion...concussions now have taken on a new definition, just like most things in this country, so your right on it has changed more broad in its diagnose, functional problems are signs, but lots of people may experience a concussion with no functional problems, heck by some standards may not even know they had one. That's why this is a big issue right now, there have been WAY SEVERE cases that Dr's made the assumption that a concussion "may" have cause something to happen, and the media took it an ran, now everyone is trying to figure out what to do. When truth is there probably have been no studies on concussions except the SEVERE OVERKILL and we will error on the side of caution, which is a good thing. Right now at this point that's what we are trying to find out is what is the right spot, and we are starting with safety first (which is GREAT) but must be willing to modify as we learn. Actually, Head CT and standard MRI cannot diagnose concussion. They simply cannot. There are no signs on imaging. The reason for the confusion is that kids go to the ER and get a CT and the doc comes out and says he has a concussion. What really happened is the doc saw some symptoms and a history and the CT was normal. That's what a concussion looks like on CT-- normal. DTI MRI can sort of make the diagnosis in that there seem to be some signs that are evident, but the protocols are being developed and this modality is not usually available in general hospitals. And what you say about learning disabilities, etc is true. That is why the test is ONLY valid in comparison to a baseline test given preseason. I had a friend who's kid was held out for the season after the symptoms of an obvious concussion resolved because the doc he went to said he failed some balance and motor tests. Problem is, we don't know what the kid could do BEFORE his concussion. I think that doctor was wrong, and was doing what you said-- erring on side of (probably excess) caution. |
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jan 15, 2014 17:09:43 GMT -6
So these kids can mess this tests up by messing up on them in the first place and taking a long time between answers?
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jan 15, 2014 17:20:48 GMT -6
.concussions now have taken on a new definition. THIS!!! You beat me to it. I think that is the whole problem. There is miscommunication because the definition has changed. The team with 17 concussions has 17 because they are defining them differently. A post in another thread had someone say that a kid got hit on Monday and the trainer held him out because he was concussed. But was going to test him again on Tuesday. Well if he passed the test on Tuesday, does that mean he now gets to practiced? If that is the case, then he wasn't concussed!!!! Not saying that he shouldn't have been held out on Monday. Not saying that he shouldn't be allowed to practice after he passes the test. I am saying that if he was truly concussed by a hit on Monday, then no way in heck should he practice/play for a couple of weeks and gets cleared by a doctor not a trainer. Period. See, I am actually very safety conscience. The point is, that kid wasn't concussed. He just was possibly concussed. I have no problem with holding him until he passes the test and cleared. I just have a problem with calling it a concussion!! I really think miscommunication is killing our discussion and the national discussion. Failing one diagnostic test does not mean you are concussed. Just that it is possible. |
|
