The Influence of Heavier Football Helmet Faceguards on Head Impact Location and Severity.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether players with heavier faceguards have increased odds of sustaining top of the head impacts and head impacts of higher severity. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: On-field. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-five division I collegiate football players. INTERVENTIONS: Faceguard mass was measured. Head impact location and severity (linear acceleration [gravity], rotational acceleration [radian per square second], and Head Impact Technology severity profile [unitless]) were captured for 19 379 total head impacts at practices using the Head Impact Telemetry System. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Players' faceguards were categorized as either heavier (>480 g) or lighter (≤480 g) using a median split. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed for sustaining top of the head impacts between faceguard groups using a random intercepts generalized logit model. We compared head impact severity between groups using random intercepts general linear models (α = 0.05). Player position was included in all models. RESULTS: Overall, the 4 head impact locations were equally distributed across faceguard groups (F(3,26) = 2.16, P = 0.117). Football players with heavier faceguards sustained a higher proportion impacts to the top of the head (24.7% vs 17.5%) and had slightly increased odds of sustaining top (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.01-2.94) head impacts rather than front of the head impacts. CONCLUSIONS: Football players wearing heavier faceguards might be slightly more prone to sustaining a higher proportion of top of the head impacts, suggesting that greater faceguard mass may make players more likely to lower their head before collision. Individuals involved with equipment selection should consider the potential influence of faceguard design on head impact biomechanics when recommending the use of a heavier faceguard.

Concussion History and Time Since Concussion Do not Influence Static and Dynamic Balance in Collegiate Athletes.

CONTEXT: Dynamic balance deficits exist following a concussion, sometimes years after injury. However, clinicians lack practical tools for assessing dynamic balance. OBJECTIVES: To determine if there are significant differences in static and dynamic balance performance between individuals with and without a history of concussion. DESIGN: Cross sectional. SETTING: Clinical research laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: 45 collegiate student-athletes with a history of concussion (23 males, 22 females; age = 20.0 ± 1.4 y; height = 175.8 ± 11.6 cm; mass = 76.4 ± 19.2 kg) and 45 matched controls with no history of concussion (23 males, 22 females; age = 20.0 ± 1.3 y; height = 178.8 ± 13.2 cm; mass = 75.7 ± 18.2 kg). INTERVENTIONS: Participants completed a static (Balance Error Scoring System) and dynamic (Y Balance Test-Lower Quarter) balance assessment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A composite score was calculated from the mean normalized Y Balance Test-Lower Quarter reach distances. Firm, foam, and overall errors were counted during the Balance Error Scoring System by a single reliable rater. One-way ANOVAs were used to compare balance performance between groups. Pearson's correlations were performed to determine the relationship between the time since the most recent concussion and balance performance. A Bonferonni adjusted a priori α < 0.025 was used for all analyses. RESULTS: Static and dynamic balance performance did not significantly differ between groups. No significant correlation was found between the time since the most recent concussion and balance performance. CONCLUSIONS: Collegiate athletes with a history of concussion do not present with static or dynamic balance deficits when measured using clinical assessments. More research is needed to determine whether the Y Balance Test-Lower Quarter is sensitive to acute balance deficits following concussion.