Search

The purpose of this study was to determine changes in neurocognitive, psychosocial, and balance functioning in collegiate male and female soccer players across three consecutive years of baseline testing compared to a control group of non-contact athletes.Generalized estimating equations were used to compare changes in annual, pre-season baseline measures of neurocognitive function, neurobehavioral and psychological symptoms, and postural stability between collegiate soccer players (n = 75; 51 [68%] female soccer players) and non-contact athletes (n = 210; 133 [63%] female non-contact athletes) across three consecutive years.Among all participants, the group-by-time interaction was not significant for any outcome measures. Overall, soccer players reported lower (better) Brief Symptom Inventory 18 Depression (p = 0.004, Exp(B) = 0.36 [95% CI 0.18-0.73]), Global Severity Index (p = 0.006, Exp(B) = 0.53 [95% CI 0.33-0.84]), and Post-Concussion Symptom Scale (PCSS) Symptom Severity (p0.001, Exp(B) = 0.45 [95% CI 0.22-0.95]) scores than non-contact athletes. No other outcome measures were different between soccer players and non-contact athletes.Among collegiate athletes, soccer players report similar or better psychosocial functioning and symptom scores than non-contact athletes. Importantly, neurocognitive functioning, neurobehavioral and psychological symptoms, and postural stability does not worsen over time in collegiate soccer players relative to their non-contact counterparts. Our findings suggest that despite possible exposure to repetitive head impacts (RHIs), collegiate soccer players do not exhibit changes in observable function and symptoms across multiple seasons.

To determine whether cognitive and psychological symptom profiles differentiate clinical diagnostic classifications (eg, history of mild traumatic brain injury [mTBI] and posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD]) in military personnel.US Active-Duty Service Members ( N = 209, 89% male) with a history of mTBI ( n = 56), current PTSD ( n = 23), combined mTBI + PTSD ( n = 70), or orthopedic injury controls ( n = 60) completed a neuropsychological battery assessing cognitive and psychological functioning. Latent profile analysis was performed to determine how neuropsychological outcomes of individuals clustered together. Diagnostic classifications (ie, mTBI, PTSD, mTBI + PTSD, and orthopedic injury controls) within each symptom profile were examined.A 5-profile model had the best fit. The profiles differentiated subgroups with high (34.0%) or normal (21.5%) cognitive and psychological functioning, cognitive symptoms (19.1%), psychological symptoms (15.3%), and combined cognitive and psychological symptoms (10.0%). The symptom profiles differentiated participants as would generally be expected. Participants with PTSD were mainly represented in the psychological symptom subgroup, while orthopedic injury controls were mainly represented in the high-functioning subgroup. Further, approximately 79% of participants with comorbid mTBI and PTSD were represented in a symptomatic group (∼24% = cognitive symptoms, ∼29% = psychological symptoms, and 26% = combined cognitive/psychological symptoms). Our results also showed that approximately 70% of military personnel with a history of mTBI were represented in the high- and normal-functioning groups.These results demonstrate both overlapping and heterogeneous symptom and performance profiles in military personnel with a history of mTBI, PTSD, and/or mTBI + PTSD. The overlapping profiles may underscore why these diagnoses are often difficult to diagnose and treat, but suggest that advanced statistical models may aid in identifying profiles representing symptom and cognitive performance impairments within patient groups and enable identification of more effective treatment targets.

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) commonly occur among military Service Members and Veterans and have heterogenous, but also overlapping symptom presentations, which often complicate the diagnoses of underlying impairments and development of effective treatment plans. Thus, we sought to examine whether the combination of whole brain gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM) structural measures with neuropsychological performance can aid in the classification of military personnel with mTBI and PTSD.Active-Duty US Service Members (n = 156; 87.8% male) with a history of mTBI, PTSD, combined mTBI+PTSD, or orthopedic injury completed a neuropsychological battery and T1- and diffusion-weighted structural neuroimaging. Cortical, subcortical, ventricular, and WM volumes and whole brain fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), radial diffusivity (RD), and axial diffusivity (AD) were calculated. Latent profile analyses were performed to determine how the GM and WM indicators, together with neuropsychological indicators, classified individuals.For both GM and WM, respectively, a 4-profile model was the best fit. The GM model identified greater ventricular volumes in Service Members with cognitive symptoms, including those with a diagnosis of mTBI, either alone or with PTSD. The WM model identified reduced FA and elevated RD in those with psychological symptoms, including those with PTSD or mTBI and comorbid PTSD. However, contrary to expectation, a global neural signature unique to those with comorbid mTBI and PTSD was not identified.The findings demonstrate that neuropsychological performance alone is more robust in differentiating Active-Duty Service Members with mTBI and PTSD, whereas global neuroimaging measures do not reliably differentiate between these groups.