Objective

International consensus statements highlight the value of neuropsychological testing for sport-related concussion. Computerized measures are the most frequently administered assessments of pre-injury baseline and post-injury cognitive functioning, despite known measurement limitations. To our knowledge, no studies have explored the convergent validity of computerized Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) and traditional, well-validated paper and pencil (P&P) neuropsychological tests in high school student athletes. This study aimed to assess a “hybrid” adolescent test battery composed of ImPACT and P&P measures to determine the extent of shared variance among ImPACT and P&P tests to inform comprehensive yet streamlined assessment.

Method

Participants included male and female high school student athletes in the Southeastern United States participating in American football, hockey, and soccer who completed a battery of ImPACT and P&P tests (N = 69).

Results

We performed principal component analysis with ProMax rotation to determine components of the hybrid battery that maximally accounted for observed variance of the data (Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin factor adequacy = 0.71). Our analysis revealed four independent factors (Verbal Learning and Memory, ImPACT Memory and Speed, Verbal Processing Speed/Executive Functions, and Nonverbal Processing Speed/Executive Functions) explaining 75% of the variance.

Conclusions

Findings of this study in adolescent student athletes support those from the adult literature demonstrating the independence of ImPACT and P&P tests. Providers should be aware of limitations in using standalone ImPACT or P&P measures to evaluate cognitive functioning after concussion. If confirmed in a larger, clinical sample, our findings suggest that a hybrid battery of computerized and P&P measures provides a broad scope of adolescent cognitive functioning to better inform recovery decisions, including return to play after concussion.

This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)