Chris G. Koutures, MD, FAAP Pediatric and sports medicine specialist

Please Check Our New Brand and Website: www.ActiveKidMD.com

Comprehensive blend of general pediatric and sport medicine care with an individualized approach that enhances the health and knowledge of patients and their families

ACCEPTING NEW PATIENTS- CALL 714-974-2220 FOR AN APPOINTMENT

 

CLICK HERE FOR DR. KOUTURES GENERAL PEDIATRICS INFORMATION
Proud physician:
USA Volleyball Mens/Womens National Teams
CS Fullerton Intercollegiate Athletics
Chapman University Dance Department
Orange Lutheran High School

Co-Author of Acclaimed Textbook

Pediatric Sports Medicine: Essentials for Office Evaluation

Orange County Physician Of Excellence, 2015 and 2016

 

Filtering by Tag: new California concussion law

New California Football Contact Limits Provide Unique Opportunity to Study Effect on Concussions

According to the findings of a study published in the May 4th online edition of JAMA Pediatrics, practice periods are a major source of concussion for the high school football player

While the actual rate of concussion is higher in game play, just over half of the reported concussions took place during practice times.

The authors suggest that strategies should be implemented to evaluate technique, limit player-to-player contact and overall head impact exposures, and reduce other higher risk practice situations.

While the jury is still out on what constitutes proper technique, the mandates of California Assembly Bill 2127 will afford a vital opportunity to further study the influence of practice time limitations on concussion rates in high school football players.

The bill prohibits high schools from conducting more than 2 full-contact practices per week during the preseason and regular season, and prohibits this full-contact portion of the practice from exceeding 90 minutes in a single day.

To clarify, "full-contact practice" means a practice where drills or live action is conducted that involves collisions at game speed, where players execute tackles and other activity that is typical of an actual tackle football game.

Based on the findings of the above JAMA Pediatrics study, the hypothesis is that these new restrictions should reduce concussion rates in practice simply by limiting exposure time and cumulative risk.

Now, one might ask, why would there possibly not be a reduction in concussion rates?

  • Is there a chance that limited practice times could lead to less comfort with tackling that could result in an actual higher game rate of concussion?
  • Could football programs feel pressure to get in as much contact as possible during the 2 allocated 90 minutes practice periods, possibly leading to more cumulative exposure during that time?

A multi-location review of concussion rates (game and practice) is essential to confirm the effects of California AB 2127. 

In such a study, I would also suggest that concussion rates be broken down by academic grade of player, and even take into account years of experience of tackle football.

I wonder if neophytes (namely incoming freshman) who have never previously played tackle football could be at higher risk from contact practice time limits.  Would the contact time restrictions have less influence on upperclassman who have played tackle football for a longer period of time?

All stakeholders will be eager to see if indeed there is a documented reduction in overall concussion rates, and if such a reduction is seen across all levels of high school football.







Thoughts on California Interscholastic Federation Concussion Return Protocol

Right before California Assembly Bill 2127 became law on January 1, 2015, I wrote on this blog many questions remained unanswered about certain provisions, namely clarifying what is meant by "no less than a seven day" return progression, when does this seven day period begin, and a better definition of appropriate supervision during this period.

Today, after reviewing the recently released California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) Concussion Return to Play Protocol, it is now readily apparent that the intent of the law was to ensure that if an athlete was concussed let's say on a Friday night, that they will not be able to return to play the following Friday night.

This comes as no great surprise to many of us in the sports medicine community and serves to bring uniformity to something that we had suspected since the bill was signed into law.

There are several other provisions of the Return to Play progression that should be of unique interest, and I will list them below along with my professional comments:

cif.jpg
  • Return to play cannot be sooner than 7 days AFTER the diagnosis of a concussion by an physician MD/DO
    • Now we know when the "clock can start" and what concerns me is not so much the sports with one game a week, but those with multiple games a week.
    • If a football player is concussed on Friday night, having the physician evaluation the following Monday or even Thursday doesn't have a real time sensitivity since that athlete is out for that next week's game and still has the seven day period potentially available to play in the following weeks game.
    • However, let's take the case of a basketball player with a tournament that involves key games possibly 8-9 days after a concussion. There might be pressure placed on the physician to see that athlete ASAP to get the clock started for a potential return in that 8-9 day period
  • No physical activity for at least 2 full symptom-free days AFTER you have seen a physician 
    • Given the emphasis on the no return within a full week after a concussion, can certainly see why this element was put into place.
    • Does limit the judgement of medical teams to allow light, low-risk activities that might be well-tolerated in the initial post-concussion period and may also actually assist in that recovery.
  • A certified athletic trainer (ATC), physician, or identified concussion monitor (e.g., coach, athletic director), must initial each stage successfully passed
    • Leads to an increase in the paper trail but also makes each school responsible for monitoring a step-wise return to play and not just allowing a full immediate return to sport. 
    • Hopefully this provision will further underscore the important role of a certified athlete trainer on a school campus. For those schools that don't have one, this might serve as a strong motivator to find necessary resources to support the hire of an ATC to help maintain compliance with this new law.
  •  Minimum of 6 days to pass (non-contact) Stages I and II. Prior to beginning (contact) State III, please make sure that written physician (MD/DO) clearance for return to play, after successful completion of Stages I and II, has been given to your school’s concussion monitor. 
    • That 6 day minimum again written with a direct eye on football and not having an athlete return for that next game after a concussion
    • Here's another spot where having an ATC can make the process easier- as a physician, if I have a strong working relationship with an ATC, I might not need to see the athlete back in my office before allowing return to contact if the ATC is comfortable with the return protocol and progress of the individual athlete.
    • Now, if there is no ATC on campus, stronger chance that I will require an office visit between non-contact and contact return.
  • MANDATORY: You must complete at least ONE contact practice before return to competition. (Highly recommend that Stage III be divided into 2 contact practice days as outlined above.) 
    • Remember that AB 2127 also limits full contact  practices to only 2 ninety minute sessions per week. 
    • Curious to see how a return to play that recommends 2 contact sessions works out with these new contact practice limitations

I will close out this post with a  passionate request to CIF and the sports and school communities: despite any concerns or disagreements, this protocol is now in place and thus must be publicized, discussed and shared through multiple mediums to get the word out to all coaches, athletes, parents, administrators, and medical providers. . I can honestly say that with past state or CIF concussion policy updates, I was shocked at how often reasonable, involved, and usually well-informed colleagues were unaware or ignorant of these changes. If all schools are following the same protocol, there will be more universal acceptance of this new policy, so CIF cannot passively oversee dissemination, it must take a very active and vocal role to increase the appropriate use and eventual greater acceptance of this new protocol.

 

 

Are California Schools and Medical Providers Prepared for New Concussion Law?

 

California Assembly Bill 2127 authored by  Assembly Member Ken Cooley (D-Rancho Cordova) will take formal effect on January 1, 2015 and will provide that, if a licensed health care provider determines that the athlete sustained a concussion or a head injury, the athlete is required to complete a graduated return-to-play protocol of no less than 7 days in duration under the supervision of a licensed health care provider. This stipulation is an extension of previous California legislative mandates passed in 2011 and 2012 that require:

  • Immediate removal for the remainder of the day of any high school athlete suspected of having a concussion
  • Prohibit the return of the athlete to that activity until he or she is evaluated by, and receives written clearance from a licensed health care provider
  • Each year, a concussion and head injury information sheet must be signed and returned by athletes and parent/guardian
  • Concussion education must now be part of required first aid training of every high school coach

For my initial reaction to this law, click here

In discussions with coaches, administrators, and fellow sports medicine providers, I'll throw out a few questions that have arose regarding several nuances of the law:

  • When is the earliest that the 7-day return protocol begins?
    • Is it potentially at the time of formal diagnosis of a concussion by a licensed provider?
    • Is it when the athlete is fully cleared of post-concussion symptoms?
    • Can the period begin before a formal diagnosis is made?
  • What is the formal definition of supervision?
    • Can an athletic trainer assume the role of supervision under the guidance of a physician?
  • Given that the bill also limits contact football practices to two 90 minute periods per week, if the timing of those two practices is perhaps a day before a player's progression is ready for contact, can he have alternate contact to possibly play in a game if otherwise having an appropriate recovery?
  • Are school and medical providers aware and sufficiently prepared for these new edicts?
    • Is there agreement or clarification on the above terms and concerns?
    • Have concussion management plans, if already in place, been modified or reviewed to address the new mandates?

Certain that there are other questions and thoughts out there- please use this as a forum to share with others.