Fink’s Rule

Fink’s Rule”: when there is a diagnosed fracture of the face and jaw (excluding the nasal bone) the forces absorbed during the injury will be beyond a threshold to elicit a concussive episode.  This would indicate to the clinician that the person should ALSO be evaluated for a concussion.

Alternate definition: when the terms “jaw injury”, “head contusion” , or “concussion-like symptoms” are present in an injury report one should be aware that forces were elicited to the head, and an assessment for a concussion should be indicated.


15 thoughts on “Fink’s Rule

  1. Mark July 24, 2011 / 07:26

    What does Fink know about jaw injury? please explain your knowlege of this injury

  2. Dustin Fink July 25, 2011 / 07:06

    This rule has nothing to do with jaw injuries, it has everything to do with forces applied to the head. And because you make mouth gear, that some could consider borderline fraudulently claims to reduce concussions, makes you an expert?

  3. Mark July 25, 2011 / 07:11

    A military research initiative underway and a congressional brain injury day invite, base on our data is far from fraudulent. Closed minded thinking, lumping all mouth guards in one basket is the problem. When it comes to the boxers glass jaw, not many, have any idea why. I guess I am an expert on this aspect of jaw injury.

  4. Dustin Fink July 25, 2011 / 11:48

    “underway”, “your data” are terms one would associate with self interest. I have also noticed since our last email conversation you have changed your wording on your products/website. Hmmm, I wonder why.

    You cannot claim your product can reduce the chances of a concussion, period. Your product does not and will not do anything to attenuate the vectors of the forces on the head. Even if hit in the jaw, the force need to “slam the mandible into the “brain cavity” (yup your quotes from your website)” would cause the head to accelerate backwards thus causing the coup-contracoup injury, that would be independent of the jaw slamming the skull.

    I am glad you are an expert, and use that information for good, and not to push products and make money.

  5. Mark July 26, 2011 / 06:51

    Your not an expert, so don’t act as if you have all the answers, particularly in this area. We are only speaking of jaw related concussion, coup contra coup, does not apply. The NFL has omitted this mechanism of chin strap energy transfer from there research and only now, five years after their notification, has the military recognized the need for this type of protection. This is what has caused a lag in the research. At one point the NFL was the trend setter in this research and it caused many problems of omission. Leading to this new lawsuit claiming they concealed data and vital information. One Havard expert has stated in a peer reviewed paper, the Patriots have the lowest concussion rate annually due to this protocol. He runs a floor of research at Mass General Hospital, if true, this is vital information and can’t be ignored. In 2006 the Pats reported two concussions, in the same year the Colts had 22.

  6. Dustin Fink July 26, 2011 / 17:19

    You are correct I am not an expert on “jaw related concussions”, what is a “jaw related concussion” anyhow? How is that different from a concussion? I posted videos of concussions that impacts were to the jaw, and in the boxing examples they resulted in KO’s…

    Chin straps cannot stop the head from rotating, accelerating, or decelerating, that is a moot point.

    You keep pointing to the military, what does that have to do with the price of rice in China? Sure the military is doing research about concussions, as far as I have read about these studies they have not found that a mouth piece of any kind can attenuate concussive forces to the brain, period.

    I would like to see the data on the 2006 concussion reports, care to share it with the whole blog? Or just make overtures to the fact that this OUTDATED and INCOMPLETE data set is correct? Heck “if true” the Patriots were the luckiest team EVER. You should know, and everyone reading should know that reporting concussions in the NFL today is limited at best, and in 2006 that information would and should be considered UNRELIABLE at best.

    As for your insinuation that I am “hostile” to mouth gear, that is flat out wrong, I am hostile to the companies that promote something that is virtually impossible. There is ZERO published data or research that shows mouth gear can attenuate a concussion, not a “jaw related concussion” a concussion. The Law’s of Physics will not allow this to happen, PERIOD.

  7. VtRaceMom September 23, 2011 / 13:52

    Mark with all due respect, your comments (tone of which is unprofessional) on this blog has only cast more doubt in my mind as to this question of whether or not mouthgear can reduce the rate of concussions involving impact to the jaw. Old thought was that mandible vs skull contact due to a misaligned jaw could cause a concussion due to the force applied to the jaw. I thought that this outdated 2006 argument was proven inconclusive as, if there is force sufficient to the jaw to cause a concussion then the force in and of itself jaw or no jaw is enough to cause the brain to move within the skull causing a concussive event. Perhaps I have misunderstood the basic dynamic of injury?

    I have become wary of any research based on “reported concussions” we are all very well aware of the pitfalls there!

    I will also keep watch on substantive data regarding the claims by UA (Bite Tech) that mouthgear enhances performance by reducing stress and fatigue due to athletes clinching their teeth. Jaw realignment, opening of air passages etc….

    I will keep my eye on the research and in the meantime will certainly continue to purchase high quality boil n bite mouthgear for my sons for soccer and skiing, to protect their teeth.

    • Dustin Fink September 25, 2011 / 09:31


      Thank you very much for your EDUCATED response, at least a “mom” can see through the BS that is coming out of companies like his…

  8. Tina September 26, 2011 / 14:00

    You may think that Dustin is alone in his professional opinions of the mouthgear, but, you would be sorely mistaken. Every collegue I have come in contact with has repeatedly told coaches and parents, “No mouthguard will protect against a concussion.” Dustin has explained repeatedly why we make this statement, so, I won’t bore you with repeating it. Just so you know, the same goes with helmet manufacturers…you’re not alone.

    • Dustin Fink September 26, 2011 / 19:52

      thank you I think I will just collect these and other comments and put in a post sometime… You should see his “work” in the Week 2 Concussion Report…

  9. Pingback: Red Light » Posts An awful month for NHL concussions «
  10. Pingback: Red Light » Posts Injury questions clouding NHL «
  11. Pingback: Red Light » Posts Injury questions clouding NHL «

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s