Conditions for Neuroendocrine Dysfunction (NED) screening for patients with mTBI." 2) Discuss data sources and screening methodology to determine screening. Design: Descriptive study utilizing de-identified data extraction from the Military Health System Management Analysis and Reporting Tool (M2) for outpatient clinical and laboratory visits. This is a Quality Assurance Assessment to determine adherence to DCoE Clinical Recommendations for NED screening in mTBI patients. Setting: Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs) within the Regional Health Command-Atlantic (RHC-A). Participants: All active duty service members diagnosed with mTBI (nZ10,805) being treated as outpatients in the RHC-A. Interventions: Quality Assurance Research conducted to assess adherence to the 2012 DCoE Clinical Recommendation for "Indications and Conditions for NED Screening Post mTBI" during four consecutive years (10/01/2013 thru 09/30/2017). Main Outcome Measure(s): Main outcome is the percentage of mTBI patients with any NED symptom who received all NED serum screening labs according to DCoE Clinical Recommendations. Results: Of 10,805 patients diagnosed with TBI, 3,557 (32.9%) had at least one NED symptom coded as a diagnosis. 20.2% of these patients had all 7 recommended serum NED screening labs completed, 30.1% had 4-6 labs performed, 50.2% had 1-3 labs done and 16% did not have any NED screening labs. Conclusions: The majority of mTBI patients with NED symptoms were not screened according to the recommended DCoE Recommendations (87.2%). Data utilized was only on mTBI patients with a NED symptom coded as a diagnosis (33%). Chart review would be required to obtain data on the 67% of mTBI patients with NED symptoms documented within the medical encounter notes. Key Words: mTBI, Neuroendocrine Dysfunction, Screening, Qual- ity Assurance Disclosures: None. Research Poster 657176 NIH/NINDS and DoD CDE Recommendations: Biomechanical Devices in Head Impact and Blast Exposure Dynamics Adam Bartsch (Prevent Biometrics), Carol Taylor-Burds (NIH/NINDS), David Camarillo (Stanford University), Joy Esterlitz (The Emmes Cor- poration), Katelyn Gay (The Emmes Corporation), Kristen Joseph (The Emmes Corporation), Patrick Bellgowan (NIH/NINDS), Sherita Ala’i (The Emmes Corporation) Research Objectives: To facilitate study start-up and data sharing in blunt head impact and blast exposure biomechanical device research, the National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) and Department of Defense (DoD) collaborated to develop version 1.0 Common Data Element (CDE) recommendations. This was achieved through the development of standardized definitions and collection frameworks for data collected in research utilizing biomechanical devices. Design: The Working Group (WG) split into three subgroups: Head Accelerometry, Impact Video, and Blast Exposure; they focused on blunt head impact in sports/activities, use of video information to confirm device measurements and data commonly captured using blast sensors, respectively. These subgroups met regularly to recommend standard meanings, formats and appropriate values for data elements based on their review of the types of data currently collected in this research field. Setting: Participating WG members are from a variety of institutions including academia, industry and military. Participants: Twenty-six subject matter experts in blast exposure, blunt head impact and inertial loading joined the CDE development WG. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure(s): As the CDEs are used in research in the biomechanical device field and input is received from the research community, updates to the CDEs will be made to reflect the current state of the science. Results: For six weeks, public feedback will be elicited on the WG’s end products. Version 1.0 of the Biomechanical Device CDE recommendations, which includes CDE metadata, template case report forms and guidelines documents, will be made available through the NINDS CDE website in late February 2018. Conclusions: These Biomechanical Device CDE recommendations will allow for future data-sharing and robust metadata analysis. They are a valuable start-up resource for new and experienced researchers. Key Words: Common Data Elements, Biomechanical, Head Impact, Blast Injuries Disclosures: None. Research Poster 657213 Not Worth the Headache? Comparison of Single- Item Versus Multiple-Item Headache Ratings in Service Members Amy Bowles (Brooke Army Medical Center), Douglas Cooper (Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center), Hannah Castellaw (Brooke Army Medical Center), Jan Kennedy (Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center), Lisa Lu (Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center) Research Objectives: Questionnaires help clinicians determine the presence and severity of symptoms. However, questionnaires need to be focused to prevent fatigue and minimize time constraints. Headache is one of the most common symptoms after traumatic brain injury (TBI)[1]. We examined the association between a single item headache rating from a post-concussive checklist [Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory (NSI)] and a six-item headache measure [Headache Impact Test (HIT-6)] to evaluate how well the NSI captures the impact of headaches. Design: Retrospective analysis of clinical database. Setting: Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio TX. Participants: From 2007-2010, 595 patients referred to the Brain Injury Rehabilitation Service completed both the HIT-6 and NSI at intake. Participants were primarily young (mean 31 years old) male (91%) Army (91%) enlisted (89%) service members with a history of TBI (81%). Interventions: N/A. Main Outcome Measure(s): Correlation between NSI headache item and HIT-6 score. Results: The NSI headache item is positively correlated with (rZ.81, p<.001) and accounts for 66% of the HIT-6 total score variance (F(1,593) Z1135, p<.001). Correlation of the NSI headache item with the six individual HIT items range from rZ.68 to rZ.76. Including only cases with a history of mild TBI (nZ393) yielded a comparable result (rZ.81, p<.001). Excluding participants who have NSI Validity-10 scores above 22, which suggests possible symptom over-reporting[2], yielded comparable results (total sample, nZ555, rZ.80, p<.001; mTBI only, nZ362, rZ.80, p<.01). Conclusions: Response to the NSI item (how much have headaches disturbed you in the last 2 weeks) captures substantively similar information as the HIT-6. For clinical settings with time constraints, if headache is not the primary focus of treatment, NSI response sufficiently captures the impact of headaches on functioning. Key Words: Brain injuries, Military, Comorbidity, Headache Disclosures: None. Research Poster 657128 Oculomotor Assessment of Traumatic Brain Injury Chantele Friend (DVBIC), John King (National Intrepid Center of Excellence), Louis French (Walter Reed National Military Medical Center), Saafan Malik (Defense Health Agency), Walter Carr (Walter Reed Army Institute of Research) Research Objectives: To compare three eye tracking devices* to determine which is the most sensitive to changes in oculomotor function associated with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Design: We report preliminary findings from a clinical feasibility study comparing participants with TBI versus those without history of TBI. e170 Research Posters www.archives-pmr.org