Responsivity of Concussion Symptom Domains to a Mind-Body Intervention for Young Adults With a Recent Concussion and Anxiety: A Pilot RCT.
Brenda C Lovette, Jafar Bakhshaie, Ana-Maria Vranceanu and 1 others
PMID 40853262WHAT IT FOUND
Young adults with recent concussion and anxiety reported lower cognitive, physical, affective and sleep symptoms after both a mind-body toolkit and an active health education program.
This small trial cannot separate treatment effects from natural recovery.
Key findings
01At baseline, the four symptom domains had broadly similar scores relative to the total symptom score, with affective symptoms slightly larger.
02From baseline to immediately after the intervention, the mind-body group showed large within-group improvements in all four domains, while the active comparison group showed medium within-group improvements in all four domains.
03From baseline to three-month follow-up, the mind-body group showed large within-group improvements in all four domains.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was a pilot secondary analysis of a feasibility trial and was not powered to test efficacy or compare groups. Both groups received active interventions, and the design cannot separate treatment effects from natural recovery or nonspecific support. The sample was limited to English-speaking young adults with a concussion 3 to 10 weeks earlier and at least mild anxiety, so results may not apply to other ages, more severe concussion histories, different anxiety levels, or chronic symptoms. The Post-Concussion Symptom Scale was not originally designed to measure separate symptom domains, so the domain scores may not fully capture each domain. The supplied text does not report dropout, missing assessment data, or how many participants completed each time point.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. No funding source is reported in the supplied text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the large effect sizes as proof that TOR-C works or is better than HE-C. The study was a pilot, used within-group effect sizes rather than significance tests, and did not test efficacy or between-group differences.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →