Citation

Smith AMA, Stuart MJ, Greenwald RM, Benson BW, Dodick DW, Emery CA, Finnoff JT, Mihalik JP, Roberts WO, Sullivan CA, Meeuwisse WH. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2011; 90(8): 694-703.

Affiliation

Sports Medicine Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (AMS, MJS, JTF); SIMBEX, LCC, Lebanon, New Hampshire (RMG); Sport Medicine Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada (BWB, CE, WHM); College of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona (DWD); The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (JPM); University of Minnesota, St. Paul (WOR); Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (C-AS).

Copyright

(Copyright © 2011, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins)

DOI

10.1097/PHM.0b013e318224736b

PMID

21765281

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: : The objective of this proceeding was to integrate the concussion in sport literature and sport science research on safety in ice hockey to develop an action plan to reduce the risk, incidence, severity, and consequences of concussion in ice hockey. DESIGN: : A rationale paper outlining a collaborative action plan to address concussions in hockey was posted for review 2 mos before the "Ice Hockey Summit: Action on Concussion." Focused presentations devoted specifically to concussion in ice hockey were presented during the summit, and breakout sessions were used to develop strategies to reduce concussion in the sport. The proceedings and a detailed scientific review (a matrix of solutions) were written to disseminate the evidence-based information and resulting concussion reduction strategies. The manuscripts were reviewed by the authors, advisors, and contributors to ensure that the opinions and recommendations reflect the current level of knowledge on concussion in hockey. RESULTS: : Six components of a potential solution were articulated in the "Rationale" paper and became the topics for breakout groups that followed the professional scientific lectures. Topics that formed the core of the action plan were metrics and databases; recognizing, managing, and return to play; hockey equipment and ice arenas; prevention and education; rules and regulations; and expedient communication of the outcomes. The attendees in the breakout sessions identified the action items for each section. The most highly ranked action items were brought to a vote in the open assembly, using an Audience Response System. The strategic planning process was conducted to assess the following: "Where are we at?" "Where must we get to?" "What strategies are necessary to make progress on the prioritized action items?" CONCLUSIONS: : Three prioritized action items for each component of the solution and the percentage of the votes received are listed in the body of this proceeding.

Language: en