The importance of language in describing concussions: A qualitative analysis

Peter Knowles,Katherine Schneider,Amy K Bugwadia,Piya Sorcar,Roy D Pea,Daniel H Daneshvar,Christine M Baugh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pmrj.13256

2024-08-27

Abstract:Background: Concussions are mild traumatic brain injuries that are often undiagnosed due to difficulties in identifying symptoms. To minimize the negative sequelae associated with undiagnosed concussion, efforts have targeted improving concussion reporting. However, knowing more about concussions does not indicate how likely an athlete is to report their concussion. Alternatively, the attitudes and beliefs of athletes and surrounding stakeholders have shown to be a better indication of whether an athlete intends to report their concussion. Prior research has shown that athletes report concussions less often when the injury is described using language that minimizes their severity, such as when it is referred to as a "ding." This study evaluated whether describing concussions using the word "brain" was associated with individuals' underlying attitudes and beliefs about the injury's severity. Objective: To measure the relationship between perceived concussion severity and the language used to describe concussions, specifically whether participants used the word "brain" in describing the injury. Methods: One-on-one semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted, and a cross sectional secondary qualitative analysis was performed to assess participants' perceived concussion severity and their use of the word "brain" to describe concussions. Design: Cross-sectional secondary qualitative analysis. Setting: One-on-one semistructured telephone interviews. Participants: In 2017, 94 individuals involved in high school sports, including athletes, coaches, educators, parents of athletes, and athletic directors were recruited via convenience sampling. Main outcome measures: Respondents' perceived severity of concussions. Results: Individuals who used a brain phrase to describe concussion also perceived concussions as more severe (p < .001). Specifically, those who described concussions with maximum severity had higher odds of using brain phrases than those who described concussions as having minimum (odds ratio [OR] = 0.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.002-0.299, p < .001) or moderate severity (OR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.086-0.647, p = .003), with the most significant relationship found among coaches. Conclusions: These findings demonstrate the relationship between medical terminology and perceived severity of concussions. This relationship may play a role in concussion reporting behavior for coaches, athletes, and parents. Education programs using similar medical terminology may promote concussion reporting behaviors.