Evaluating the Effect of Concussion-Education Programs on Intent to Report Concussion in High School Football
Daniel H. Daneshvar, Maya Yutsis, Christine M. Baugh, Roy Pea, Shelley Goldman, Gerald A. Grant, Jamshid Ghajar, Lee Sanders, Christine Chen, Lea‐Tereza Tenekedjieva, Shravya Gurrapu, Ross Zafonte, Piya Sorcar
Abstract
CONTEXT: Concussion underreporting leads to delays in diagnosis and treatment, prolonging recovery time. Athletes' self-reporting of concussion symptoms, therefore, reduces risk. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of 3 concussion-education programs in improving concussion-reporting intention. DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial. SETTING: Three high schools in California. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: A total of 118 male football players (age = 14.88 ± 1.19 years). INTERVENTION(S): Participants were randomly assigned to receive concussion education via CrashCourse (CC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) video education materials (CDC-Vi), or CDC written education materials (CDC-Wr). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome was concussion-reporting intention, which was assessed at baseline, immediately after education, and at 1-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were concussion knowledge, concussion-reporting attitudes, perceived concussion-reporting norms, and perceived behavioral control. RESULTS: Across all education formats, a total sample of athletes improved in concussion-reporting intention at immediate and 1-month follow-ups (mean improvements = 6.8% and 11.4%, respectively; F4,224 = 11.1, P < .001). Similar findings were observed across all education formats in secondary analyses examining knowledge, attitudes, and perceived behavioral control. However, we noted differences in concussion-reporting intention by education format and time (F4,224 = 2.8, P = .03). Post hoc analysis showed that athletes who received CC had increased concussion-reporting intentions at immediate and 1-month follow-ups (baseline = 4.7, immediate follow-up = 6.1, 1-month follow-up = 6.0; F16,61.1 = 6.1, P = .007) compared with increases only at 1-month follow-up for CDC-Vi (baseline = 4.3, immediate follow-up = 5.2, 1-month follow-up = 5.8; F1.6,61.6 = 8.4, P = .001) and no improvement for CDC-Wr (P = .10). Secondary analyses indicated differences between CC and both CDC interventions in concussion knowledge and attitudes at immediate and 1-month follow-ups. We identified no differences in perceived behavioral control among interventions (F4,216 = 0.2, P = .93) or perceived concussion-reporting norms across (F4,224 = 0.3, P = .73) or among (F4,224 = 1.7, P = .15) interventions. CONCLUSIONS: All athletes exhibited an improved intent to report concussions, increased concussion knowledge, better concussion attitudes, and more perceived behavioral control at both immediate and 1-month follow-ups. However, athletes randomized to receive CC reported a greater intent to report concussion, more knowledge, and improved concussion-reporting attitudes when compared with those who received CDC-Vi and CDC-Wr.