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.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Nelson LD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6637940 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
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.
Nelson Lindsay D LD Furger Robyn E RE Gikas Peter P Lerner E Brooke EB Barr William B WB Hammeke Thomas A TA Randolph Christopher C Guskiewicz Kevin K McCrea Michael A MA
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS 20170327 4
<h4>Objectives</h4>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).<h4>Methods</h4>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 o ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMild 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.ObjectiveThe 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.MethodsStudies 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.ResultsOf the 104 papers, 33 met the inclusion criteria for this scoping review. Thematic analysis and NCAT psychometrics were reported and summarized.ConclusionsWhen 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.
| S-EPMC7939942 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Limited data exist comparing the performance of computerized neurocognitive tests (CNTs) for assessing sport-related concussion. We evaluated the reliability and validity of three CNTs-ANAM, Axon Sports/Cogstate Sport, and ImPACT-in a common sample. High school and collegiate athletes completed two CNTs each at baseline. Concussed (n=165) and matched non-injured control (n=166) subjects repeated testing within 24 hr and at 8, 15, and 45 days post-injury. Roughly a quarter of each CNT's indices had stability coefficients (M=198 day interval) over .70. Group differences in performance were mostly moderate to large at 24 hr and small by day 8. The sensitivity of reliable change indices (RCIs) was best at 24 hr (67.8%, 60.3%, and 47.6% with one or more significant RCIs for ImPACT, Axon, and ANAM, respectively) but diminished to near the false positive rates thereafter. Across time, the CNTs' sensitivities were highest in those athletes who became asymptomatic within 1 day before neurocognitive testing but was similar to the tests' false positive rates when including athletes who became asymptomatic several days earlier. Test-retest reliability was similar among these three CNTs and below optimal standards for clinical use on many subtests. Analyses of group effect sizes, discrimination, and sensitivity and specificity suggested that the CNTs may add incrementally (beyond symptom scores) to the identification of clinical impairment within 24 hr of injury or within a short time period after symptom resolution but do not add significant value over symptom assessment later. The rapid clinical recovery course from concussion and modest stability probably jointly contribute to limited signal detection capabilities of neurocognitive tests outside a brief post-injury window. (JINS, 2016, 22, 24-37).
| S-EPMC4882608 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-associated neurocognitive disorder (HAND) is present in 30-60 % of HIV-positive (HIV+) individuals and can be assessed by neuropsychological testing and level of functional impairment. HAND diagnosis therefore requires accurate assessment of functional impairment. The Computer Assessment of Mild Cognitive Impairment (CAMCI) is a computer-based screening tool that includes performance-based measures of functional impairment. We sought to evaluate the CAMCI as a functional assessment tool in HAND. One hundred fourteen HIV+ patients and 38 HIV-negative (HIV-) patients underwent neuropsychological and CAMCI testing. Cognitive status for HIV+ subjects was classified using the Frascati criteria. HIV+ subjects grouped together and classified by cognitive impairment performed worse than HIV- subjects on several of the CAMCI tasks, including following directions to the supermarket (p = 0.05, p = 0.03), recalling which items to purchase (p = 0.01, p = 0.02), and remembering to stop at a supermarket (p < 0.01, p = 0.01) and the post office (p < 0.01, p = 0.03). After controlling for hepatitis C status and depression symptomatology, the tasks "following directions to the supermarket" and the "recalling which items to purchase" were no longer significant. The "remembering to run two separate errands" tasks retained their significance (p < 0.01 for both tasks). A subset of the CAMCI tasks therefore successfully differentiated HIV+ patients from HIV- individuals. Differences in hepatitis C status and depression symptomatology could account for some of the function assessment differences in the CAMCI. These results suggest the CAMCI could be a useful objective performance-based functional assessment in patients with HIV.
| S-EPMC3790918 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Stoffenmanager®v4.5 and Advanced REACH Tool (ART) v1.5, two higher tier exposure assessment tools for use under REACH, were evaluated by determining accuracy and robustness. A total of 282 exposure measurements from 51 exposure situations (ESs) were collected and categorized by exposure category. In this study, only the results of liquids with vapor pressure (VP) > 10 Pa category having a sufficient number of exposure measurements (n = 251 with 42 ESs) were utilized. In addition, the results were presented by handling/activity description and input parameters for the same exposure category. It should be noted that the performance results of Stoffenmanager and ART in this study cannot be directly compared for some ESs because ART allows a combination of up to four subtasks (and nonexposed periods) to be included, whereas the database for Stoffenmanager, separately developed under the permission of the legal owner of Stoffenmanager, permits the use of only one task to predict exposure estimates. Thus, it would be most appropriate to compare full-shift measurements against ART predictions (full shift including nonexposed periods) and task-based measurements against task-based Stoffenmanager predictions. For liquids with VP > 10 Pa category, Stoffenmanager®v4.5 appeared to be reasonably accurate and robust when predicting exposures [percentage of measurements exceeding the tool's 90th percentile estimate (%M > T) was 15%]. Areas that could potentially be improved include ESs involving the task of handling of liquids on large surfaces or large work pieces, allocation of high and medium VP inputs, and absence of local exhaust ventilation input. Although the ART's median predictions appeared to be reasonably accurate for liquids with VP > 10 Pa, the %M > T for the 90th percentile estimates was 41%, indicating that variance in exposure levels is underestimated by ART. The %M > T using the estimates of the upper value of 90% confidence interval (CI) of the 90th percentile estimate (UCI90) was considerably reduced to 18% for liquids with VP > 10 Pa. On the basis of this observation, users might be to consider using the upper limit value of 90% CI of the 90th percentile estimate for predicting reasonable worst case situations. Nevertheless, for some activities and input parameters, ART still shows areas to be improved. Hence, it is suggested that ART developers review the assumptions in relation to exposure variability within the tool, toward improving the tool performance in estimating percentile exposure levels. In addition, for both tools, only some handling/activity descriptions and input parameters were considered. Thus, further validation studies are still necessary.
| S-EPMC6939284 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Tier 1 occupational exposure assessment tools recommended for use under the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and restriction of CHemicals (REACH) were evaluated using newly collected measurement data. Evaluated tools included the ECETOC TRAv2 and TRAv3, MEASEv1.02.01, and EMKG-EXPO-TOOL. Fifty-three exposure situations (ESs) based on tasks/chemicals were developed from National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health field surveys. During the field surveys, high quality contextual information required for evaluating the tools was also collected. For each ES, applicable tools were then used to generate exposure estimates using a consensus approach. Among 53 ESs, only those related to an exposure category of liquids with vapor pressure (VP) > 10 Pa had sufficient numbers of exposure measurements (42 ESs with n = 251 for TRAv2 and TRAv3 and 40 ESs with n = 243 for EMKG-EXPO-TOOL) to be considered in detail. The results for other exposure categories (aqueous solutions, liquids with VP ≤ 10 Pa, metal processing, powders, and solid objects) had insufficient measurement to allow detailed analyses (results listed in the Supplementary File). Overall, EMKG-EXPO-TOOL generated more conservative results than TRAv2 and TRAv3 for liquids with high VP. This finding is at least partly due to the fact that the EMKG-EXPO-TOOL only considers pure substances and not mixtures of chemical agents. For 34 out of 40 ESs available for chemicals with VP > 10 Pa, the liquid was a mixture rather than a pure substance. TRAv3 was less conservative than TRAv2, probably due to additional refinement of some input parameters. The percentages of exposure measurement results exceeding the corresponding tool estimates for liquids with VP > 10 Pa by process category and by input parameters were always higher for TRAv3 compared to those for TRAv2. Although the conclusions of this study are limited to liquids with VP > 10 Pa and few process categories, this study utilized the most transparent contextual information compared to previous studies, reducing uncertainty from assumptions for unknown input parameters. A further validation is recommended by collecting sufficient exposure data covering other exposure categories and all process categories under REACH.
| S-EPMC6939290 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRapid magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols may be effective in the emergency department (ED) to evaluate nontraumatic neurologic complaints. We evaluate neuroimaging (rapid MRI [rMRI]), head computerized tomography [HCT], and full MRI) use following widespread implementation of rMRI protocols in a pediatric emergency department (ED).MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study in a tertiary care pediatric ED of encounters with neuroimaging during two 9-month periods: one prior to (control period) and one after generalized availability of 4 rMRI protocols (rMRI period). The primary outcome was differences in neuroimaging rates between the two periods. Secondary outcomes included ED process measures, unsuccessful imaging, and undetected pathology, with full MRI within 14?days as the reference standard.ResultsThere were 1052 encounters with neuroimaging during the control and 1308 during the rMRI periods. Differences in neuroimaging between periods were 27.7% for rMRI (95% CI, 24.4, 31.0), -?21.5% for HCT (95% CI, -?25.5, -?17.5), and?-?6.2% for full MRI (95% CI, -?9.3, -?3.1%.) Time to imaging (182 [IQR 138-255] versus 86 [IQR 52-137] minutes) as well as ED length of stay (396 [IQR 304-484] versus 257 [IQR 196-334] minutes) was longer for rMRI versus HCT (p?<?0.01). Between the control and rMRI periods, there were differences in types of neuroimaging performed for patients with altered mental status, headache, seizure, shunt dysfunction, stroke, syncope, trauma, vomiting, infection, and other neurologic complaints (p?<?0.05). rMRI studies were unsuccessful in 3.6% of studies versus 0.0% of HCTs (p?<?0.01). The 22 unsuccessful rMRI studies were unsuccessful due to artifacts from dental hardware (n?=?2) and patient motion (n?=?20). None of the rMRI studies with full MRI follow-up imaging had undetected pathology; the false negative rate for the HCT exams was as high as 25%.ConclusionsAfter routine ED use of 4 rMRI protocols, there was a more than 20% decrease in HCT use without missed diagnoses. Time to neuroimaging and length of stay were longer for rMRI than HCT, with higher rates of unsuccessful imaging. Despite these limitations, rMRI may be an alternative to HCT for nontraumatic complaints in the ED.
| S-EPMC6956479 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceMild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) affects millions of Americans each year. Lack of consistent clinical practice raises concern that many patients with mTBI may not receive adequate follow-up care.ObjectiveTo characterize the provision of follow-up care to patients with mTBI during the first 3 months after injury.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used data on patients with mTBI enrolled in the Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI) study between February 26, 2014, and August 25, 2016. We examined site-specific variations in follow-up care, the types of clinicians seen by patients receiving follow-up care, and patient and injury characteristics associated with a higher likelihood of receiving follow-up care. The TRACK-TBI study is a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal observational study of patients with TBI presenting to the emergency department of 1 of 11 level I US trauma centers. Study data included patients with head trauma who underwent a computed tomography (CT) scan within 24 hours of injury, had a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 13 to 15, were aged 17 years or older, and completed follow-up care surveys at 2 weeks and 3 months after injury (N = 831).Main outcomes and measuresFollow-up care was defined as hospitals providing TBI educational material at discharge, hospitals calling patients to follow up, and patients seeing a physician or other medical practitioner within 3 months after the injury. Unfavorable outcomes were assessed with the Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire.ResultsOf 831 patients (289 [35%] female; 483 [58%] non-Hispanic white; mean [SD] age, 40.3 [16.9] years), less than half self-reported receiving TBI educational material at discharge (353 patients [42%]) or seeing a physician or other health care practitioner within 3 months after injury (367 patients [44%]). Follow-up care varied by study site; adjusting for patient characteristics, the provision of educational material varied from 19% to 72% across sites. Of 236 patients with a positive finding on a CT scan, 92 (39%) had not seen a medical practitioner 3 months after the injury. Adjusting for injury severity and demographics, patient admission to the hospital ward or intensive care unit, patient income, and insurance status were not associated with the probability of seeing a medical practitioner. Among the patients with 3 or more moderate to severe postconcussive symptoms, only 145 of 279 (52%) reported having seen a medical practitioner by 3 months.Conclusions and relevanceThere are gaps in follow-up care for patients with mTBI after hospital discharge, even those with a positive finding on CT or who continue to experience postconcussive symptoms.
| S-EPMC6324305 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Kidneys with "high" Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) are often biopsied and pumped, yet frequently discarded.In this multicenter study, we describe the characteristics and outcomes of kidneys with KDPI of 80 or greater that were procured from 338 deceased donors. We excluded donors with anatomical kidney abnormalities.Donors were categorized by the number of kidneys discarded: (1) none (n = 154, 46%), (2) 1 discarded and 1 transplanted (n = 48, 14%), (3) both discarded (n = 136, 40%). Donors in group 3 were older, more often white, and had higher terminal creatinine and KDPI than group 1 (all P < 0.05). Biopsy was performed in 92% of all kidneys, and 47% were pumped. Discard was associated with biopsy findings and first hour renal resistance. Kidney injury biomarker levels (neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, IL-18, and kidney injury molecule-1 measured from donor urine at procurement and from perfusate soon after pump perfusion) were not different between groups. There was no significant difference in 1-year estimated glomerular filtration rate or graft failure between groups 1 and 2 (41.5 ± 18 vs 41.4 ± 22 mL/min per 1.73 m; P = 0.97 and 9% vs 10%; P = 0.76).Kidneys with KDPI of 80 or greater comprise the most resource consuming fraction of our donor kidney pool and have the highest rates of discard. Our data suggest that some discarded kidneys with KDPI of 80 or greater are viable; however, current tools and urine and perfusate biomarkers to identify these viable kidneys are not satisfactory. We need better methods to assess viability of kidneys with high KDPI.
| S-EPMC5290306 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceHead and neck cancer (HNC) and its treatment may negatively alter neurocognitive and speech functioning. However, the prevalence of neurocognitive impairment among patients with HNC before treatment is poorly studied, and the association between neurocognitive and speech functioning is unknown, which hampers good interpretability of the effect of HNC treatment on neurocognitive and speech function.ObjectivesTo document neurocognitive functioning in patients with HNC before treatment and to investigate the association between neurocognitive and speech functioning.Design, setting, and participantsProspective cohort study of newly diagnosed patients with HNC before treatment using a large sample obtained in a nationwide, multicenter setting (Netherlands Quality of Life and Biomedical Cohort Study in Head and Neck Cancer [NET-QUBIC] project).Main outcome and measuresObjective neuropsychological measures of delayed recall, letter fluency, and executive functioning, as well as patient-reported outcome measures on neurocognitive speech and functioning, were collected before treatment.ResultsIn total, 254 patients with HNC participated (71.7% male), with a mean (SD) age of 62 (10) years. The response rate ranged from 81.9% (208 of 254) to 84.6% (215 of 254). Objective neurocognitive measures indicated that 4.7% (10 of 212) to 15.0% (32 of 214) of patients were initially seen with moderate to severe cognitive impairment. Mild to moderate impairment was found in 12.3% (26 of 212) to 26.2% (56 of 214) of patients. The most altered domains were delayed recall and letter fluency. Seven percent (15 of 208) of the patients reported high levels of everyday neurocognitive failure, and 42.6% (89 of 209) reported speech problems. Objective neurocognitive function was not significantly associated with patient-reported neurocognitive or speech functioning, but the results from patient-reported outcome measures were significantly correlated.Conclusions and relevanceResults of this study demonstrate a high prevalence of impaired speech functioning among patients with HNC before treatment, which is in line with previous findings. A novel finding is that neurocognitive impairment is also highly prevalent as objectively measured and as self-perceived. Understanding the reason why patients with HNC are initially seen with neurocognitive impairment before the start of treatment is important because this impairment may complicate patient-clinician interaction and alter treatment adherence and because treatment itself may further worsen cognitive functioning. In addition, low self-perceived neurocognitive and speech functioning before treatment may decrease a patient's confidence in communicative participation and perceived quality of life. Disentangling the associations between objective and patient-reported neurocognitive and speech functions is an important area for future research.
| S-EPMC6439757 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundComputerized migraine diagnostic tools have been developed and validated since 1960. We conducted a systematic review to summarize and critically appraise the quality of all published studies involving computerized migraine diagnostic tools.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature search using PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, snowballing, and citation searching. Cutoff date for search was 1 June 2021. Published articles in English that evaluated a computerized/automated migraine diagnostic tool were included. The following summarized each study: publication year, digital tool name, development basis, sample size, sensitivity, specificity, reference diagnosis, strength, and limitations. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) tool was applied to evaluate the quality of included studies in terms of risk of bias and concern of applicability.ResultsA total of 41 studies (median sample size: 288 participants, median age = 43 years; 77% women) were included. Most (60%) tools were developed based on International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria, half were self-administered, and 82% were evaluated using face-to-face interviews as reference diagnosis. Some of the automated algorithms and machine learning programs involved case-based reasoning, deep learning, classifier ensemble, ant-colony, artificial immune, random forest, white and black box combinations, and hybrid fuzzy expert systems. The median diagnostic accuracy was concordance = 89% [interquartile range (IQR) = 76-93%; range = 45-100%], sensitivity = 87% (IQR = 80-95%; range = 14-100%), and specificity = 90% (IQR = 77-96%; range = 65-100%). Lack of random patient sampling was observed in 95% of studies. Case-control designs were avoided in all studies. Most (76%) reference tests exhibited low risk of bias and low concern of applicability. Patient flow and timing showed low risk of bias in 83%.ConclusionDifferent computerized and automated migraine diagnostic tools are available with varying accuracies. Random patient sampling, head-to-head comparison among tools, and generalizability to other headache diagnoses may improve their utility.
| S-EPMC8793115 | biostudies-literature