If Invalid PVT Scores Are Obtained, Can Valid Neuropsychological Profiles Be Believed?

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (7) ◽  
pp. 1192-1202
Author(s):  
David W Loring ◽  
Felicia C Goldstein

Abstract Background Performance Validity Testing (PVT) decision-making rules may be indeterminate in patients with neurological disease in which PVT characteristics have not been adequately studied. We report a patient with multiple sclerosis (MS) who failed computerized PVT testing but had normal memory scores with a neuropsychological profile consistent with expected MS disease-related weaknesses. Method Neuropsychological testing was conducted on two occasions in a middle-aged woman with an established MS diagnosis to address concerns of possible memory decline. Testing was discontinued after PVT scores below recommended cut-points were obtained during the first evaluation. During the second assessment, subthreshold PVT scores on a different computerized PVT were obtained, but unlike the first assessment, the entire neuropsychological protocol was administered. Results Despite subthreshold computerized PVT scores, normal learning and memory performance was obtained providing objective data to answer the referral question. Other neuropsychological findings included decreased processing speed, poor working memory, and poor executive function consistent with her MS diagnosis. Embedded PVT scores were normal. Conclusions We speculate that poor computerized PVT scores resulted from the disease-related features of MS, although we also discuss approaches to reconcile apparently contradictory PVT versus neuropsychological results if the contributions of disease-related variables on PVTs scores are discounted. This case demonstrates the value of completing the assessment protocol despite obtaining PVT scores below publisher recommended cutoffs in clinical evaluations. If subthreshold PVT scores are considered evidence of performance invalidity, it is still necessary to have an approach for interpreting seemingly credible neuropsychological test results rather than simply dismissing them as invalid.

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 1007-1007
Author(s):  
Armistead-Jehle P ◽  
Ingram P ◽  
Morris N

Abstract Objective Recent research has worked to explore the relationships between symptom and performance validity testing. The current study sought to examine the association between PAI over-reporting SVTs and well validated stand-alone and embedded PVTs. Methods Retrospective review of 468 active duty Army cases referred for outpatient neuropsychological testing at a Military Health Center. Each subject was administered the PAI, MSVT, NV-MSVT, and RBANS Effort Index. Groups were defined in two ways, as valid (0 PVT failures) or invalid (1 or more PVT failures) and based on the number of failed PVTs (0, 1, 2, and 3). Results Partial results are summarized here for the valid/invalid analysis. The PAI Negative Impression Management (NIM), Multi-Feigning Index (MFI), and Malingering Index (MAL) differed significantly as a function of PVT performance (p < .05). Differences on Rogers Discriminant Function were not significant. AUC for NIM, MAL, and MFI were .69, .66, and .54 (respectively). AUC for RDF was unacceptable at .49. At a T-score of 64 the NIM scale had specificity of .91, sensitivity of .32 and at a T-score of 59 the MAL had specificity of .91 and sensitivity of .14. Conclusions There appears an association between PVTs and PAI over-reporting scales, such that elevations on the NIM, MAL, and MFI scales are related to PVT failure. However, the sensitives of these scales are limited in predicting PVT failure. To this end, the current data are in line with previous studies that indicate the need to administer both performance and symptom validity scales.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
James Tonks ◽  
Charlotte Katie Whitfield ◽  
W. Huw Williams ◽  
Alan M. Slater ◽  
Ian J. Frampton

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (8) ◽  
pp. 1432-1437
Author(s):  
Robert D Shura ◽  
Katherine H Taber ◽  
Patrick Armistead-Jehle ◽  
John H Denning ◽  
Jared A Rowland

Abstract Objective The purpose of this experimental pilot study was to evaluate whether distraction can affect results of performance validity testing. Method Thirty-three veterans who have served in the US military since 09/11/2001 (Mage = 38.60, SD = 10.85 years) completed the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM), Trail Making Test, and Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT). Subjects were randomly assigned to complete the MSVT in one of three experimental conditions: standard administration, while performing serial 2 s (Cognitive Distraction), and while submerging a hand in ice water (Physical Distraction). Results All participants included in primary analyses passed the TOMM (n = 30). Physical distraction did not affect performance on the MSVT. Cognitive distraction negatively affected MSVT performance. Conclusions Cognitive distraction can substantially affect MSVT performance in a subgroup of individuals. Physical distraction did not significantly affect MSVT performance.


2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 1015-1015
Author(s):  
R Cervantes ◽  
W Lopez Hernandez ◽  
J Knight ◽  
P Litvin ◽  
A Bueno ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective Traumatic brain injury (TBI) survivors often exhibit problems with executive function (EF). Language use can also impact EF test performances. We examined the effects of TBI and bilingualism/monolingualism on several EF tests. Method The sample (N = 94) consisted of 37 healthy controls (19 bilingual; 18 monolingual), 30 acute TBI participants (10 bilingual; 20 monolingual), and 27 chronic TBI participants (16 bilingual; 11 monolingual). Acute TBI participants were tested 6 months post-injury and chronic TBI participants were tested 12 months or more post-injury. Stroop Color-Word (SCW), Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System Letter Fluency (DKEFS-LF), Trail Making Test part B (TMT-B) and a EF global composite (EF-GC) were used to assess EF. All participants passed performance validity testing. 3X2 ANOVAs were conducted to determine the effect of TBI and bilingualism/monolingualism on EF performances. Results Main effects were found between groups (control and TBI groups) on SCW, p = .046, ηp² = .07, TMT-B, p = .042, ηp² = .07, and EF-GC, p = .005, ηp² = .13; the 6-month TBI group performed worse than controls on TMT-B and EF-GC. Main effects were found for bilingualism/ monolingualism on SCW, p = .012, ηp² = .07, and TMT-B, p = .034, ηp² = .05; monolingual participants performed better than bilingual participants. No significant interactions between TBI and language were found. Conclusion The TBI group underperformed on SCW, TMT-B, and EF-GC compared to controls; relative to monolinguals, bilinguals underperformed on the SCW and TMT-B only. In conclusion, our findings seem to suggest that monolinguals have better cognitive flexibility compared to bilinguals that result in better EF performances.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document