Search

Background: While concussions are common pediatric injuries, a lack of agreement on a standard definition of recovery creates multiple challenges for clinicians and researchers alike., Hypothesis: The percentage of concussed youth deemed recovered as part of a prospective cohort study will differ depending on the recovery definition., Study Design: Descriptive epidemiologic study of a prospectively enrolled observational cohort., Level of Evidence: Level 3., Methods: Participants aged 11 to 18 years were enrolled from the concussion program of a tertiary care academic center. Data were collected from initial and follow-up clinical visits ≤12 weeks from injury. A total of 10 recovery definitions were assessed: (1) cleared to full return to sports; (2) return to full school; (3) self-reported return to normal; (4) self-reported full return to school; (5) self-reported full return to exercise; (6) symptom return to preinjury state; (7) complete symptom resolution; (8) symptoms below standardized threshold; (9) no abnormal visio-vestibular examination (VVE) elements; and (10) ≤1 abnormal VVE assessments., Results: In total, 174 participants were enrolled. By week 4, 63.8% met at least 1 recovery definition versus 78.2% by week 8 versus 88.5% by week 12. For individual measures of recovery at week 4, percent recovered ranged from 5% by self-reported full return to exercise to 45% for ≤1 VVE abnormality (similar trends at 8 and 12 weeks)., Conclusion: There is wide variability in the proportion of youth considered recovered at various points following concussion depending on the definition of recovery, with higher proportions using physiologic examination-based measures and lower proportions using patient-reported measures., Clinical Relevance: These results further emphasize the need for a multimodal assessment of recovery by clinicians as a single and standardized definition of recovery that captures the broad impact of concussion on a given patient continues to be elusive., Competing Interests: The following authors declared potential conflicts of interest: K.B.M., C.C.M., M.R.P., K.B.A., and C.L.M. received a grant from Pennsylvania Department of Health (DOH). K.B.A. and C.L.M. received grant R01NS097549 from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.