scholarly journals Traumatic Brain Injury-3Results from the Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center's “Head to Head” Comparison of Four Computerized Neurocognitive Assessment Tools (NCATs): ANAM4, CNS-VS, CogState, and ImPACT

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 656-666
Author(s):  
W Cole ◽  
J Arrieux ◽  
J Arrieux ◽  
B Ivins
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Neurocognitive Assessment

scholarly journals Neurocognitive Assessment Tools for Military Personnel With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Scoping Literature Review

10.2196/26360 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e26360
Author(s):  
Chelsea Jones ◽  
Jessica Harasym ◽  
Antonio Miguel-Cruz ◽  
Shannon Chisholm ◽  
Lorraine Smith-MacDonald ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Military Personnel ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Neurocognitive Assessment ◽  
Military Populations ◽  
Neuropsychological Assessments

Background Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) occurs at a higher frequency among military personnel than among civilians. A common symptom of mTBIs is cognitive dysfunction. Health care professionals use neuropsychological assessments as part of a multidisciplinary and best practice approach for mTBI management. Such assessments support clinical diagnosis, symptom management, rehabilitation, and return-to-duty planning. Military health care organizations currently use computerized neurocognitive assessment tools (NCATs). NCATs and more traditional neuropsychological assessments present unique challenges in both clinical and military settings. Many research gaps remain regarding psychometric properties, usability, acceptance, feasibility, effectiveness, sensitivity, and utility of both types of assessments in military environments. Objective The aims of this study were to explore evidence regarding the use of NCATs among military personnel who have sustained mTBIs; evaluate the psychometric properties of the most commonly tested NCATs for this population; and synthesize the data to explore the range and extent of NCATs among this population, clinical recommendations for use, and knowledge gaps requiring future research. Methods Studies were identified using MEDLINE, Embase, American Psychological Association PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, Psych Article, Scopus, and Military & Government Collection. Data were analyzed using descriptive analysis, thematic analysis, and the Randolph Criteria. Narrative synthesis and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guided the reporting of findings. The psychometric properties of NCATs were evaluated with specific criteria and summarized. Results Of the 104 papers, 33 met the inclusion criteria for this scoping review. Thematic analysis and NCAT psychometrics were reported and summarized. Conclusions When considering the psychometric properties of the most commonly used NCATs in military populations, these assessments have yet to demonstrate adequate validity, reliability, sensitivity, and clinical utility among military personnel with mTBIs. Additional research is needed to further validate NCATs within military populations, especially for those living outside of the United States and individuals experiencing other conditions known to adversely affect cognitive processing. Knowledge gaps remain, warranting further study of psychometric properties and the utility of baseline and normative testing for NCATs.

scholarly journals Prospective, Head-to-Head Study of Three Computerized Neurocognitive Assessment Tools Part 2: Utility for Assessment of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury in Emergency Department Patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 293-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindsay D. Nelson ◽  
Robyn E. Furger ◽  
Peter Gikas ◽  
E. Brooke Lerner ◽  
William B. Barr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Mild Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Trauma Center ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Post Injury ◽  
Neurocognitive Assessment ◽  
Level I

AbstractObjectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of three computerized neurocognitive assessment tools (CNTs; i.e., ANAM, DANA, and ImPACT) for assessing mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in patients recruited through a level I trauma center emergency department (ED). Methods: mTBI (n=94) and matched trauma control (n=80) subjects recruited from a level I trauma center emergency department completed symptom and neurocognitive assessments within 72 hr of injury and at 15 and 45 days post-injury. Concussion symptoms were also assessed via phone at 8 days post-injury. Results: CNTs did not differentiate between groups at any time point (e.g., M 72-hr Cohen’s d=−.16, .02, and .00 for ANAM, DANA, and ImPACT, respectively; negative values reflect greater impairment in the mTBI group). Roughly a quarter of stability coefficients were over .70 across measures and test–retest intervals in controls. In contrast, concussion symptom score differentiated mTBI vs. control groups acutely), with this effect size diminished over time (72-hr and day 8, 15, and 45 Cohen’s d=−.78, −.60, −.49, and −.35, respectively). Conclusions: The CNTs evaluated, developed and widely used to assess sport-related concussion, did not yield significant differences between patients with mTBI versus other injuries. Symptom scores better differentiated groups than CNTs, with effect sizes weaker than those reported in sport-related concussion studies. Nonspecific injury factors, and other characteristics common in ED settings, likely affect CNT performance across trauma patients as a whole and thereby diminish the validity of CNTs for assessing mTBI in this patient population. (JINS, 2017, 23, 293–303)

scholarly journals Correspondence of the Boston Assessment of Traumatic Brain Injury-Lifetime and In-Theater Department of Defense Medical Records

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sahra Kim ◽  
Alyssa Currao ◽  
Jennifer R. Fonda ◽  
Brigitta Beck ◽  
Alexandra Kenna ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Department Of Defense ◽  
Medical Records ◽  
Brain Injuries ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
System Level ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Convenience Sample

Abstract Background: Since 2006, efforts have been made to increase the identification of traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) in post-9/11 military personnel. The BAT-L is the first validated instrument to diagnose TBIs throughout the lifespan in post-9/11 Veterans. The objective is to investigate the correspondence of the Boston Assessment of TBI-Lifetime (BAT-L) diagnostic prevalence and injury severity of traumatic brain injury with in-theater medical records from Department of Defense (DoD). Methods: A convenience sample of 153 Veterans deployed in 2011 enrolled in the TRACTS longitudinal cohort study was examined. Retrospective review of DoD online medical records to determine diagnostic prevalence and injury severity for all head injury cases during deployment were compared with diagnostic prevalence and injury severity from the BAT-L clinical interview using Chi-square analyses.Results: There was moderate correspondence for TBI diagnosis between the BAT-L and DoD records (κ = 0.42). Sensitivity was 72.7% and specificity was 82.8%. Comparison of injury severity also had moderate correspondence (κ = 0.41). Missing TBI diagnostic data from DoD records was frequent; 43% percent of TBIs reported on the BAT-L did not have any documentation of mTBI assessment or diagnosis in DoD records while 83% did not have in-theater documentation.Conclusions: Diagnosis of TBI via the BAT-L retrospective interview was both sensitive and specific when compared to DoD medical records. However, diagnostic correspondence was only moderate. This lack of diagnostic agreement was related to multiple factors including lack of documentation of injury, differences in assessment tools and goals, and other combat-related motivational factors associated with failure to report injuries while deployed. Several policies were implemented to address underreporting and under-documentation of TBI, yet challenges remain. Findings suggest changes at both individual-level (e.g. service members) and system-level (e.g. DoD/military branches) are needed to adequately diagnose and document all TBI during deployment.

Social communication following traumatic brain injury part I: State-of-the-art review of assessment tools

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
McKay Moore Sohlberg ◽  
Sheila MacDonald ◽  
Lindsey Byom ◽  
Heidi Iwashita ◽  
Rik Lemoncello ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Social Communication ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Assessment Tools
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document