Do our Team Doctors turn a blind eye?

[SteelCrazy]

Pittsburgh Steelers running back Isaac Redman admits he played with concussion

If you just so happened to be watching the Pittsburgh Steelers take on the Cincinnati Bengals in Week Two, you may recall that running back Isaac Redman was taken out of the game with concussion like symptoms on the opening kickoff.

Minutes later though, Redman (after a short trip to the locker room) returned – presumably cleared of any concussion, or, so we thought.

Redman today shared some information that likely has the NFL less than thrilled as he admitted that not only suffered and played through a concussion, but said that he was ‘out of it’ for the entire game.

Per the Post Gazette:

Redman left the second game of the season after he was hit in the head on the kickoff, which he said gave him a concussion, but he returned to play in that game at Cincinnati after he was evaluated, apparently fooling the doctors into letting him return to play.

“I had a concussion,” Redman said Wednesday. “I was pretty much out of it the rest of the game. I just tried to go back in.”

He was successful, too. During the game, the Steelers announced Redman was being evaluated for a concussion. He returned shortly thereafter in uniform and re-entered the game for the first offensive series of the second quarter.

So how did he fool the medical staff into thinking he was fit to return?

“I said I was all right,” he answered.

Yikes.

http://fansided.com/2013/09/26/pittsburgh-steelers-running-back-isaac-redman-admits-played-concussion/

[Shawn]

People fool docs all the time. Much of an assessment is based upon history...what is the patient telling you. While the physical does play a role, the history is much more important in making most medical assessments.

[pittpete]

They probably couldn't tell the difference if he was concussed or not.
Probably just as unintelligent with and w/o a concussion.

[feltdizz]

People fool docs all the time. Much of an assessment is based upon history...what is the patient telling you. While the physical does play a role, the history is much more important in making most medical assessments.


how do you "fool" a doctor when it comes to a concussion? I thought the whole reason for the test is so they could no longer fool the docs?

If a guy appears to have a concussion he should sit regardless.... but we all know this won't happen because it's a win now, job on the line type of deal with most players.

[Notleadpoisoned]

Cut him today.

[Oviedo]

Cut him today.

Should have done that about three weeks ago!

[Sword]

Not helping himself or the team when you play with a concussion......

[Shawn]

how do you "fool" a doctor when it comes to a concussion? I thought the whole reason for the test is so they could no longer fool the docs?

If a guy appears to have a concussion he should sit regardless.... but we all know this won't happen because it's a win now, job on the line type of deal with most players.

Neurological testing isn't fool proof, not sure where you got your information. An assessing physician will ask several question...do you have a headache, nausea, dizziness etc...they will know if the player lost consciousness. If the testing were fool proof, why ask the questions? Neurological testing is a tool that decreases risk of a false negative exam. For instance with a mild concussion you may only have a headache with some nausea. You may test at your baseline with the neurological testing. The player lies about the headache and nausea...back in the game. After 2009, the NFL made it mandatory for a player to be taken out of the game if there was a loss of consciousness. ImPACT testing also lowers the possibility of a player "tricking the system". But, there are players who deny symptoms, and who test close enough to their baselines to fool the tests. They are not fool proof like many things in life.