The Utility of the CVLT-C as an Embedded Validity Indicator After Pediatric Mild Traumatic Brain Injury.

Results of neuropsychological examinations depend on valid data. Whereas clinicians previously believed that clinical skill was sufficient to identify non-credible performance by examinees on standard tests, research demonstrates otherwise. Consequently, studies on measures to detect suspect effort in adults have received tremendous attention in the previous twenty years, and incorporation of validity indicators into neuropsychological examinations is now seen as integral. Few studies exist that validate methods appropriate for the measurement of effort in pediatric populations. Of extant studies, most evaluate standalone measures originally developed for use with adults. The present study examined the utility of indices from the California Verbal Learning Test – Children's Version (CVLT-C) as embedded validity indicators in a pediatric sample. Participants were 225 outpatients aged 8 to 16 years old referred for clinical assessment after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Non-credible performance (n = 39) was defined as failure of the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT). Logistic regression demonstrated that only the Recognition Discriminability index was predictive of MSVT failure (OR = 2.88, p < .001). A cutoff of z ≤ -1.0 was associated with sensitivity of 51% and specificity of 91%. In the current study, CVLT-C Recognition Discriminability was useful in the identification of non-credible performance in a sample of relatively high-functioning pediatric outpatients with mTBI. Thus, this index can be added to the short list of embedded validity indicators appropriate for pediatric neuropsychological assessment.

An assessment of the potential for neck injury due to padding of aircraft interior walls for head impact protection. Final report.

Mode of access: Internet.

Head and neck injury seminar.

Mode of access: Internet.

A report on excisions of the head of the femur for gunshot injury /

Bibliografía.

Head and neck injury criteria : a consensus workshop.

Mode of access: Internet.

Verbal recall after mild traumatic brain injury: Sensitivity of the rapid screen of concussion

The present study aimed to determine whether including a sensitive test of immediate and delayed recall would improve the diagnostic validity of the Rapid Screen of Concussion (RSC) in mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI) versus orthopaedic clinical samples. Two studies were undertaken. In Study 1, the performance of 156 mTBI and 145 orthopaedic participants was analysed to identify the number of individuals who performed at ceiling on the verbal memory subtest of the RSC, as this test required immediate and delayed recall of only five words. A second aim was to determine the sensitivity and specificity levels of the RSC. Study 2 aimed to examine whether replacement of the verbal memory subtest with the 12-word Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) could improve the sensitivity of the RSC in a new sample of 26 mTBI and 30 orthopaedic participants. Both studies showed that orthopaedic participants outperformed mTBI participants on each of the selected measures. Study 1 showed that 14% of mTBI participants performed at ceiling on the immediate and 21.2% on delayed recall test. Performance on the original battery yielded a sensitivity of 82%, specificity of 80% and overall correct classification of 81.5% participants. In Study 2, inclusion of the HVLT improved sensitivity to a level of 88.5%, decreased specificity to a level of 70% and resulted in an overall classification rate of 80%. It was concluded that although inclusion of the five-word subtest in the RSC can successfully distinguish concussed from non-concussed individuals, use of the HVLT in this protocol yields a more sensitive measure of subtle cognitive deficits following mTBI.

Psychometric assessment of recovery from mild traumatic brain injury

The Rapid Screen of Concussion (RSC) is a brief psychometric test battery, designed to provide a functional criterion to aid clinical diagnosis of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). The present research aimed to examine the utility of this instrument for assessing recovery after mTBI. Three studies were conducted. In Study 1, Discriminant Function Analysis was performed to determine how well the RSC differentiated uninjured controls (N¼16), from mTBI patients (N¼22) and moderate to severe TBI patients (N¼14), several months post-injury. As predicted, moderate to severe TBI patients achieved lower scores than the mTBI and control groups. The RSC also successfully differentiated between each of the diagnostic groups, yielding an overall correct classification rate of 75%. Study 2 examined the predictive utility of the RSC in the mTBI sample (N¼22). Acute injury performance on the RSC was correlated with post-injury scores at an average of 5.5 months post-injury. Statistically significant partial correlation coefficients (r¼0.53r¼0.80) were found for each of the subtests, showing that low acute RSC scores were predictive of poor recovery scores on the RSC after mTBI. In the third study, Reliable Change Indices were calculated on the RSC subtests to examine individual patterns of recovery from mTBI. While 17 of the 23 participants made a significant improvement on their acute injury DSST scores (74%), only 13 of 25 made a significant improvement on the Rapid Sentence Judgement Test (52%), highlighting differential recovery of function, and challenging the notion of full recovery from mTBI within 3 months. These overall results offer support for the construct and predictive validity of the RSC and demonstrate that inexpensive tests of brain function may be useful for managing mTBI acutely for prognosis.