Data from 88 of the 99 (89%) total participants met the validation criteria for at least one of the two fixation tasks. Demographics for the overall sample of concussed and control participants are provided in
Table 1. Data from 84 of the 99 total participants (85%) met the validation criteria for inclusion outlined above for the center-of-raster fixation task; for the corner-of-raster fixation task, 67 of 90 participants (75%) met the validation criteria. Concussed and control participants were similar on all demographic and medical history variables. The primary mechanisms of injury among concussed participants were sport or recreation related (45%,
n = 20) and due to motor-vehicle collisions (16%,
n = 7). On average, concussed participants were 12.85 days (
SD = 4.88) from injury and reported total concussion symptom severity scores (from the Post-Concussion Symptom Scale) of 35.6 (
SD = 24.6; possible range of 0–132).
Peak velocity versus amplitude values for each individual saccade from each group and task are plotted in
Figure 2. These plots showed a linear relationship between saccade amplitude and peak velocity (i.e., they followed the main sequence); linear regression lines fit to the data for each group were nearly identical. The histograms in
Figure 2 show fixational saccade amplitude distributions for each group and task. The histograms indicate that these distributions had substantial overlap between groups for both tasks but that in both cases the injured participant distributions showed a trend toward having larger saccades compared with the control group. Polar histograms are provided in
Figure 3 to show the distribution of fixational saccade directions for each group and task. These also show substantial overlap, but some differences were observed; although controls showed similar directionality distributions in both tasks, the concussion group’s direction distribution appeared less similar between tasks. Injured participants made a larger proportion of vertical and oblique saccades when fixating the corner of the raster compared with the center.
Summary statistics for fixational saccade amplitude, peak velocity, and peak acceleration for each group are plotted in
Figure 4. Statistical analyses showed that individual mean parameter comparisons for the center-of-raster fixation task demonstrated significantly increased amplitude (
t = 2.89,
df = 82,
p = 0.005) in concussed participants compared with controls (minimum effect size of difference = 0.63) (
Table 2). These saccades followed the main sequence (see
Figure 2) and showed significantly greater peak velocity (
t = 2.82,
df = 82,
p = 0.006) and peak acceleration (
t = 2.83,
df = 82,
p = 0.006) compared with controls (effect size of difference = 0.62).
There was a significant multivariate effect of injury group on mean fixational saccade amplitude, peak velocity, and peak acceleration (
F = 2.77,
df = 3,
p = 0.047, residual normality
p > 0.20) when participants fixated on the center of the raster. There were no significant between-group effects of gender (
F = 0.251,
df = 3,
p = 0.861), previous concussion (
F = 038,
df = 3,
p = 0.990), or migraine history (
F = 1.83,
df = 3,
p = 0.148) in a multivariate model with injury group. Fixational saccade parameters of amplitude (AUC = 0.68,
p = 0.005), peak velocity (AUC = 0.67,
p = 0.006), and peak acceleration (AUC = 0.67,
p = 0.008) significantly differentiated concussed from healthy control subjects in the center-of-raster fixation task (
Figure 5). There were no effects of concussion on fixational saccade amplitude (
t = 0.384,
df = 65,
p = 0.702), peak velocity (
t = 0.212,
df = 65,
p = 0.833), or peak acceleration (
t = 0.206,
df = 65,
p = 0.838) in the corner-of-raster fixation task.
When splitting up each 30-second trial into three, 10-second epochs, fixational saccade amplitude showed no increase with time (see
Figure 6). Amplitude reliability analysis for the three intervals were as follows: center of raster concussion group, ICC = 0.611; center of raster controls, ICC = 0.579; corner of raster concussion group, ICC = 0.709; and corner of raster controls, ICC = 0.619. Hence, 58% to 71% of the variance was due to the difference between subjects within each interval, and only 29% to 42% of the variance was due to the difference between intervals, within subjects. No significant within-subject difference by interval was seen on repeated-measures analysis for either the center-of-raster or corner-of-raster task.