71 Feasibility of Virtual Useful Field of View Assessment and Equivalence with In-Person Administration Among Youth Clinically Recovered from Concussion and Uninjured Controls

Abstract

Objective:

Youth athletes with concussion are at an increased risk of sustaining new concussions and orthopedic injuries after clearance for return-to-play. There are training programs, extensively studied in other patient populations, which can improve performance in cognitive domains that have been implicated in sport-related injury and re-injury after concussion (i.e., visual attention/processing speed). The Useful Field of View (UFOV) is one such training program, accompanied by a computerized adaptive assessment for evaluating response to training and maintenance in clinical trials. Remote UFOV assessment administration may help improve adherence, particularly in assessing long-term training effects. The current study explores the feasibility of virtual UFOV assessment and equivalence with in-person administration in youth clinically recovered from concussion and healthy controls.

Participants and Methods:

Participants included youth ages 10-18 enrolled in a longitudinal study examining neural recovery following medical clearance from concussion. UFOV was attempted in 61 participants (Mage=15.06; SD=2.00; n=19 in-person; n=42). Of these, 7 virtual administrations were discontinued due to computer limitations, and 1 in-person administration was excluded due to overall performance validity concerns. This resulted in a total sample of 53 participants (Mage=15.02, SD=2.00, 58.5% male; n=14 concussion, Mdays_since_injury=272.64, SD=185.35; n=39 controls). UFOV was administered either in-person (n=18) using manual guidelines or virtually (n=35) on the participant’s computer using video-conference screen-share and a secondary device for an additional view of the participant and their keyboard/mouse. For virtual visits, the examiner recorded concerns about the remote testing environment (e.g., screen glare, viewing distance not measured appropriately), and analyses were conducted with and without cases with concerns. Between-group (in-person vs virtual administration) demographic differences were examined using chi-square tests/t-tests. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to examine for differences in UFOV scores (ms; higher scores are worse) by administration context (in-person vs. virtual) given threats to normality.

Results:

For virtual administrations, the most commonly reported concerns about the remote testing environment were related to lighting (n=12) and viewing distance (n=3). There were no significant differences in age, sex, concussion history, sport participation history, or IQ by administration context (in-person vs. virtual). UFOV performance did not vary significantly by administration context for processing speed or divided attention subtests, but performance on the selective attention subtest was significantly better in the virtual administration group (Median in-person =93.33; Medianvirtual=63.33; U=203.00, p=0.035). This trend persisted after removing an outlier (>2SD; p=0.065) and after removing cases where lighting (p=0.060) and screen-viewing distance (p=0.085) were not adequately controlled.

Conclusions:

Though preliminary, results suggest that UFOV can be administered virtually, in youth with and without a history of concussion, but that those assessed virtually using their home computer may have an advantage, particularly for the selective attention subtest. This may be due to comfort level within the home environment or subtle differences in viewing distance that were not appreciated by the examiner remotely. Importantly, not all participants were able to complete the assessment virtually due to computer limitations. Future work with larger samples size should examine the extent to which completers vary from non-completers in terms of sociodemographic variables.