LAUSR

Background: Recent recommendations suggest incorporating patient-report outcome measures (PROMs) into concussion assessment batteries. Utilizing PROMs provides information on the patient’s perspective and how the concussion may influence the patient’s health status. Past studies evaluating PROM use among athletic trainers (ATs) found varying practices and barriers to implementation. However, there is limited data on use of PROMs in managing concussion among adolescent patients. Hypothesis/Purpose: To describe the use of PROMs as part of concussion assessment and treatment practices of ATs working in middle and high school settings. Methods: An online survey regarding concussion treatment perceptions and practices was distributed to a convenience sample of 5000 ATs through the NATA Survey Research Program. The survey included personal and institutional demographics, healthcare provider access and referral practices, perceptions of concussion treatment, clinical practice characteristics of concussion treatment and PROM use. The survey was pilot tested and validated in a sample of ATs prior to distribution. Analysis of the PROM section was conducted using descriptive statistics (percentages, frequencies) for this study. Results: The survey was accessed by 304 ATs (6.1% access rate) and completed by 153 ATs (58.3% completion rate). Of those, 27.2% (n=57) were employed in the middle school or high school setting and were analyzed for this study. Just over half of respondents had <10 years of experience (52.7%, n=30). Only 35.1% (n=20) of ATs reported they use PROMs as part of their clinical management of concussion. Of those who use PROMs, 75% (n=15) indicated that they use them always or almost always. The most commonly used generic PROMs were the Short Form 12 or 36 (25%, n=5) and Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (25%, n=5) and the most common specific PROMs were the Headache Impact Test (45%, n=9) and Dizziness Handicap Inventory (15%, n=3). Figure 1 shows the level of self-reported confidence of those utilizing PROMs. Barriers for PROM use included it being too time consuming (24.6%, n=14/57), lacking a support structure (15.8%, n=9/57), and not familiar with PROMs (14%, n=8/57). Close to one-fourth (22.8%, n=13/57) of respondents would be willing to use PROMs, but lacked time. Conclusion: While the use of PROMs is recommended in the evaluation and treatment of adolescent athletes, just over one-third of ATs providing care to these patients, use PROMs. Educational efforts for ATs should look to increase their familiarity and confidence when using PROMs for concussion while suggesting strategies to incorporate PROMs into practice. Figure 1. Self -reported confidence in use of PROMs among ATs.