Comparison of Laboratory and On-Field Performance of American Football Helmets
The relationship between laboratory and on-field performance of football helmets was assessed for 31 football helmet models selected from those worn by players in the 2015–2019 National Football League (NFL) seasons. Linear impactor tests were conducted with helmets placed on an instrumented Hybrid...
Saved in:
Published in | Annals of biomedical engineering Vol. 48; no. 11; pp. 2531 - 2541 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Cham
Springer International Publishing
01.11.2020
Springer Nature B.V |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | The relationship between laboratory and on-field performance of football helmets was assessed for 31 football helmet models selected from those worn by players in the 2015–2019 National Football League (NFL) seasons. Linear impactor tests were conducted with helmets placed on an instrumented Hybrid III head and neck assembly mounted on a sliding table. Based on impacts to each helmet at six impact locations and three velocities, a helmet performance score (HPS) was calculated using a linear combination of the head injury criterion (HIC) and the diffuse axonal multi-axis general evaluation (DAMAGE). To determine the on-field performance of helmets, helmet model usage, player participation, and incident concussion data were collected from the five NFL seasons and used to calculate helmet model-specific concussion rates. Comparison of laboratory HPS to the helmet model-specific concussion rates on a per play basis showed a positive correlation (
r
2
= 0.61,
p
< 0.001) between laboratory and on-field performance of helmet models, indicating that helmets which exhibited reduced impact severity in the laboratory tests were also generally associated with lower concussion rates on-field. Further analysis showed that NFL-prohibited helmet models exhibited a significantly higher odds of concussion (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.04–1.47;
p
= 0.017) relative to other helmet models. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 0090-6964 1573-9686 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s10439-020-02627-5 |