首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology >Clinical Utility of Ocular Assessments in Sport-Related Concussion: A Scoping Review
【2h】

Clinical Utility of Ocular Assessments in Sport-Related Concussion: A Scoping Review

机译:眼部评估在运动相关脑震荡中的临床效用:范围审查

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background/objectives: Ocular tools and technologies may be used in the diagnosis of sport-related concussions (SRCs), but their clinical utility can vary. The following study aimed to review the literature pertaining to the reliability and diagnostic accuracy of such assessments. Methods: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews was adhered to. Reference standard reliability (RSR ≥ 0.75) and diagnostic accuracy (RSDA ≥ 0.80) were implemented to aid interpretation. Results: In total, 5223 articles were screened using the PCC acronym (Population, Concept, Context) with 74 included in the final analysis. Assessments included the King-Devick (KD) (n = 34), vestibular-ocular motor screening (VOMs) and/or near point of convergence (NPC) (n = 25), and various alternative tools and technologies (n = 20). The KD met RSR, but RSDA beyond amateur sport was limited. NPC met RSR but did not have RSDA to identify SRCs. The VOMs had conflicting RSR for total score and did not meet RSR in its individual tests. The VOMs total score did perform well in RSDA for SRCs. No alternative tool or technology met both RSR and RSDA. Conclusion: Ocular tools are useful, rapid screening tools but should remain within a multi-modal assessment for SRCs at this time.
机译:背景/目标: 眼部工具和技术可用于诊断运动相关脑震荡 (SRC),但其临床应用可能会有所不同。以下研究旨在回顾与此类评估的可靠性和诊断准确性有关的文献。方法:坚持系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目 (PRISMA) 扩展,以界定评价范围。采用参考标准可靠性 (RSR ≥ 0.75) 和诊断准确性 (RSDA ≥ 0.80) 以帮助解释。结果:总共使用 PCC 首字母缩略词 (Population, Concept, Context) 筛选了 5223 篇文章,其中 74 篇纳入最终分析。评估包括 King-Devick (KD) (n = 34)、前庭眼运动筛查 (VOM) 和/或近会聚点 (NPC) (n = 25),以及各种替代工具和技术 (n = 20)。KD 符合 RSR,但业余运动之外的 RSDA 受到限制。NPC 符合 RSR,但没有 RSDA 来识别 SRC。VOM 的总分 RSR 相互冲突,并且在其单个测试中没有达到 RSR。VOMs 总分在 SRC 的 RSDA 中表现良好。没有替代工具或技术同时满足 RSR 和 RSDA。结论:眼部工具是有用的快速筛查工具,但目前应保持在 SRC 的多模式评估范围内。

著录项

代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号