TY - JOUR T1 - The Effect of Headgear Use on Concussion Injury Rates in High School Lacrosse JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2021.10.06.21264026 SP - 2021.10.06.21264026 AU - Daniel C. Herman AU - Shane V. Caswell AU - Patricia M. Kelshaw AU - Heather K. Vincent AU - Andrew E. Lincoln Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/10/07/2021.10.06.21264026.abstract N2 - Objectives The use of headgear is a controversial issue in girls’ lacrosse. We compared concussion rates among high school lacrosse players wearing versus not wearing lacrosse headgear.Methods Study participants included a sample of convenience of high schools with girls’ lacrosse from across the United States. Certified athletic trainers reported athlete exposure and injury data via the National Athletic Treatment, Injury and Outcomes Network during the 2019 through 2021 seasons. The Headgear cohort was inclusive of high schools from the state of Florida, which mandate the use of ASTM standard F3137 headgear, while the Non-Headgear cohort was inclusive of the remaining states, none of which have headgear mandates. Incidence Rate Ratios (IRR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were calculated. IRRs with corresponding CIs that excluded 1.00 were deemed statistically significant.Results 141 concussions (Headgear: 25; Non-Headgear: 116) and 357,225 Athlete Exposures (AE) were reported (Headgear: 91,074AE; Non-Headgear: 266,151AE) across all games and practices. Overall, the concussion injury rate per 1000AE was significantly higher in the Non-Headgear cohort (0.44) than the Headgear Cohort (0.27) (IRR=1.59, 95% CI:1.03 - 2.45). The IRR was significantly higher for the Non-Headgear cohort during games (1.74, 95% CI: 1.00, 3.02) but not for practices (1.42, 95% CI: 0.71, 2.83).Conclusions These findings indicate that concussion rates among high school girls’ lacrosse players not wearing headgear were 59% higher than those wearing headgear. These data support the use of protective headgear to reduce the risk of concussion among high school female lacrosse athletes.What are the new findingsThe use of lacrosse headgear meeting the ASTM F3137 standard was associated with a lower risk of experiencing a concussion injury among high school girls’ lacrosse players.How might these findings impact clinical practice in the future?Lacrosse headgear may be warranted for use for concussion risk mitigation among high school girls’ lacrosse players.Lacrosse headgear may be considered for concussion risk mitigation at other levels of play such as the youth or collegiate levels; further study is warranted.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialAs an observational cohort study, this was not part of a trial registry.Funding StatementGrant support was provided by USA Lacrosse and the National Operating Committee for Standards on Athletic Equipment.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The NATION injury-surveillance registry has been approved by the Western Institutional Review Board (Puyallup, WA), and the current investigation was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB #201802880) at the University of Florida.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData may be available upon request. ER -