Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT04492696

Comparison of Concussion Education Programs

Importance: Concussion underreporting leads to delays in diagnosis and treatment, resulting in prolonged recovery. Athletes' report of concussion symptoms is therefore an important component of risk reduction. Numerous educational interventions to improve concussion knowledge and reporting exist.

Objective: Evaluate the comparative efficacy of three concussion education programs in improving concussion-reporting intention.

Design: Randomized clinical trial conducted from August 2018 to October 2018, with assessment before, immediately after, and one-month after educational intervention.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

14 year–19 year

Sex eligibility

Male

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Stanford University

Stanford, California, 94305, United States

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion:

  • Athletes from three high school football teams in California.
  • In attendance for practice on both study dates
  • Provided signed assent and parental consent.

Exclusion:

  • Did not complete more than 50% of the questionnaire.

Treatment and study plan

Education

Other

Education

Primary outcomes

  1. Improvement in concussion reporting intention among athletes

    Time frame: 1 month

    All primary and secondary outcomes, besides those related to concussion knowledge, were assessed based on athlete responses, on a 10-point Likert type scale ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 10=strongly agree, to specific questions related to that domain. A composite measure for each outcome was created by summing athletes' responses and dividing by the number of questions asked, resulting in outcomes scaled from 1 to 10.

    A composite measure created based on the inverse of athlete responses to five questions about their concussion-reporting intention (i.e., whether they would continue playing with a concussion during "the beginning of the season," "a practice," "the middle of the season," "during a championship game," and "at the end of the season").

Secondary outcomes

  1. Improvement in concussion knowledge among athletes

    Time frame: 1 month

    Athletes answered 23 True/False questions to assess their concussion knowledge modified from previously utilized concussion educational assessments (Rosenbaum et al., 2010). A composite measure of athlete concussion knowledge was created by summing athletes' correct responses and dividing by the number of questions asked.

    Rosenbaum AM, Arnett PA. The development of a survey to examine knowledge about and attitudes toward concussion in high-school students. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2010;32(1):44-55. doi:10.1080/13803390902806535

  2. Improvement in concussion attitudes among athletes

    Time frame: 1 month

    All primary and secondary outcomes, besides those related to concussion knowledge, were assessed based on athlete responses, on a 10-point Likert type scale ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 10=strongly agree, to specific questions related to that domain. A composite measure for each outcome was created by summing athletes' responses and dividing by the number of questions asked, resulting in outcomes scaled from 1 to 10.

    A composite measure created based on athlete responses to six questions about their attitudes towards concussion reporting (i.e., the extent to which an athlete who reports a concussion would be "better off in the long run," "back on the field much faster," "proud even if teammates call me weak," "better off avoiding participation with signs and symptoms of a concussion," not "better off hiding symptoms from a doctor to not stay out as long," and not "better off toughing it out because concussions are just another injury").

  3. Improvement in concussion perceived normative beliefs among athletes

    Time frame: 1 month

    All primary and secondary outcomes, besides those related to concussion knowledge, were assessed based on athlete responses, on a 10-point Likert type scale ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 10=strongly agree, to specific questions related to that domain. A composite measure for each outcome was created by summing athletes' responses and dividing by the number of questions asked, resulting in outcomes scaled from 1 to 10.

    A composite measure created based on athlete responses to two questions assessing perceived reporting norms (i.e., the extent to which the athlete worried "my teammates would think less of me" if he reported a concussion, or needed to "hide my symptoms from my coach").

  4. Improvement in concussion perceived behavioral control among athletes

    Time frame: 1 month

    All primary and secondary outcomes, besides those related to concussion knowledge, were assessed based on athlete responses, on a 10-point Likert type scale ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 10=strongly agree, to specific questions related to that domain. A composite measure for each outcome was created by summing athletes' responses and dividing by the number of questions asked, resulting in outcomes scaled from 1 to 10.

    A composite measure created based on athlete responses to six questions about their perceived ability and confidence with concussion reporting (i.e., confidence in my ability "to report a concussion," "to help my teammate report a concussion," "to report symptoms of a concussion," "to help my teammate report symptoms of a concussion," "to report symptoms of a concussion, even if I don't think they're that bad," and "to help my teammate report symptoms of a concussion, even if I don't think they're that bad").

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Stanford University

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Comparison of Concussion Education Programs and Intent to Report Concussion in High School Football Athletes

Important dates

Study start
2018
Primary completion
2018
Study completion
2018
First posted
Jul 30, 2020
Registry last updated
Jul 30, 2020

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.