What does competently delivered neuropsychological assessment feedback look like? Development and validation of a competency evaluation tool.

Objective: Neuropsychological assessment (NP) feedback helps patients and caregivers understand assessment results to maximise their utility and impact in everyday life. Yet feedback practices are inconsistent and there are no evidence-based guidelines for how feedback should be most effectively delivered. The aim of our study was to develop a psychometrically sound feedback competency checklist, the Psychology Competency Assessment Tool - Feedback (PsyCET-F), for use in research, training, and clinical settings. Method: The Delphi method of expert consensus was used to establish checklist items that clearly described competencies important for NP feedback. To examine the inter-rater reliability of the checklist, two experienced neuropsychologists rated the competencies demonstrated by trainee neuropsychologists across four feedback sessions. Results: After two Delphi rounds, consensus was reached on the 20-item checklist. Consensus was defined as at least 80% agreement amongst the panel of 20 experts. Four item categories resulted from the Delphi: (a) Opening the Session; (b) Applying Specific Feedback Techniques; (c) Engagement, Collaboration, and Alliance; and (d) Structuring and Ending the Session. Inter-rater reliability was moderate (κW = 0.79, p <.001, 80.52% agreement) when using a simple coding system, coded as Beginner, Intermediate, Competent, and Skilful; and strong (κW = 0.82, p <.001) when competency level was coded using an 8-point, detailed coding method. Conclusions: The PsyCET-F is psychometrically sound and fit-for-purpose for measuring competencies in giving NP feedback. It can be used in the training of clinicians to develop effective feedback skills. International benchmarking and usability testing will be conducted in a future study.

Assessment and Management of Patients in the Acute Stages of Recovery after Traumatic Brain Injury in Adults: A Worldwide Survey.

Most individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) experience a period of confusion after emergence from coma, termed post-traumatic amnesia, post-traumatic confusional state, or delirium. Recent guidelines suggest the importance of assessment and consistent management during this phase, but current practice worldwide remains unknown. This survey aimed to elucidate current international practice in assessment and treatment of patients in the acute stages of recovery after TBI. The web-based survey was distributed to clinicians working with patients with acute TBI. There were 400 participants (68.8% females), from 41 countries, mostly neuropsychologists, rehabilitation physicians, and occupational therapists (OTs), with an average 12.8 years of experience. Of those working with adults (n = 376, 94%), most described this acute period as post-traumatic amnesia and used its duration to indicate injury severity. More than 85% used a tool to assess patients; in order of frequency, the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), Westmead PTA Scale (WPTAS), Galveston Orientation and Amnesia Test, Rancho Los Amigos Scale, and O-Log. Meeting criteria on the assessment tool or clinical judgment determined emergence from this phase, indicated by recovery of orientation, day-to-day memories, and ability to follow commands or participate in rehabilitation. Most patients had physiotherapy, OT, speech therapy, and environmental changes, with a third of participants indicating sedating medication was prescribed during this phase. Findings suggest that, consistent with guidelines, PTA is a widely recognized and measured TBI recovery phase, used to determine injury severity and readiness for therapy.

Comparing the Westmead Posttraumatic Amnesia Scale, Galveston Orientation and Amnesia Test, and Confusion Assessment Protocol as Measures of Acute Recovery Following Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: The duration of the acute period of recovery following traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains a widely used criterion for injury severity and clinical management. Consensus regarding its most appropriate definition and assessment method has yet to be established. OBJECTIVE: The present study compared the trajectory of recovery using 3 measures: the Westmead Post-Traumatic Amnesia Scale (WPTAS), the Galveston Orientation and Amnesia Test (GOAT), and the Confusion Assessment Protocol (CAP). Patterns of symptom recovery using the CAP were explored. PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-two participants with moderate to severe TBI in posttraumatic amnesia (PTA) on admission to an inpatient rehabilitation hospital. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Length of PTA (days), agreement between measures (%, κ coefficient), and pattern of symptom recovery. RESULTS: Participants emerged from PTA earliest on the CAP followed the GOAT, and last on the WPTAS. There was good agreement between the CAP and the GOAT as to PTA status, but both tests had poor agreement with the WPTAS. Of patients considered out of PTA on the CAP, the majority exhibited signs of amnesia on the WPTAS and one-third had clinical levels of agitation. CONCLUSION: The WPTAS identifies a later stage of PTA recovery that requires specialized management due to ongoing amnesia and agitation. The CAP and the GOAT are less sensitive to this extended period of PTA.

Economic Evaluation of Activities of Daily Living Retraining During Posttraumatic Amnesia for Inpatient Rehabilitation Following Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of structured activities of daily living (ADL) retraining during posttraumatic amnesia (PTA) plus treatment as usual (TAU) vs TAU alone for inpatient rehabilitation following severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). DESIGN: Trial-based economic evaluation from a health-system perspective. SETTING: Inpatient rehabilitation center. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=104) admitted to rehabilitation and in PTA for >7 days following severe TBI. INTERVENTIONS: Structured ADL retraining during PTA plus TAU vs TAU alone. Structured ADL retraining was manualized to minimize the risk of agitation and maximize functional improvement, following principles of errorless and procedural learning and targeting individualized therapy goals. TAU included physiotherapy and/or speech therapy during PTA plus ADL retraining after PTA emergence. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: FIM total scores at baseline, PTA emergence, hospital discharge, or final follow-up (2mo postdischarge) where FIM total scores were calculated as the sum of 5 FIM motor self-care items and a FIM meal-preparation item. RESULTS: Structured ADL retraining during PTA significantly increased functional independence at PTA emergence (mean difference: 4.90, SE: 1.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5, 8.3) and hospital discharge (mean difference: 5.22, SE: 1.4, 95% CI: 1.8, 8.7). Even in our most pessimistic scenario, structured ADL retraining was cost-saving as compared to TAU (mean: -$7762; 95% CI: -$8105, -$7419). Together, these results imply that structured ADL retraining dominates (less costly but no less effective) TAU when effectiveness is evaluated at PTA emergence and hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Structured ADL retraining during PTA yields net cost-savings to the health system and offers a cost-effective means of increasing functional independence at PTA emergence and hospital discharge.

Cognitive behavioural therapy for post-stroke fatigue and sleep disturbance: a pilot randomised controlled trial with blind assessment.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of individual cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for post-stroke fatigue and sleep disturbance compared to treatment as usual (TAU). In a parallel two-group pilot randomised controlled trial of 15 participants, nine were allocated to eight weekly sessions of adapted CBT and six continued usual care rehabilitation. The primary outcome was the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS-7) at two and four months from baseline. Secondary outcomes included measures of sleep, mood and quality of life. Outcomes were assessed by a rater who was blind to group membership. At the four-month endpoint, the CBT group demonstrated significantly reduced fatigue relative to TAU (FSS-7 mean difference: 1.92, 95% CI: 0.24 to 3.60). Significant group differences also emerged for sleep quality and depression, favouring the CBT group. Insomnia and physical quality of life improved immediately post-therapy but were no longer superior to TAU at follow-up. Overall, CBT is a promising treatment for improving post-stroke fatigue, sleep quality and depression. Gains were maintained for two months after therapy cessation and represented large treatment effects. These findings highlight the feasibility of the intervention and warrant extension to a phase III clinical trial.

Predictors of the On-Road Driving Assessment After Traumatic Brain Injury: Comparing Cognitive Tests, Injury Factors, and Demographics.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To examine the relations between performance on cognitive tests and on-road driving assessment in a sample of persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI). (2) To compare cognitive predictors of the on-road assessment with demographic and injury-related predictors. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-nine people with mild-severe TBI who completed an on-road driving assessment in an Australian rehabilitation setting. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. MAIN MEASURES: Wechsler Test of Adult Reading or National Adult Reading Test-Revised; 4 subtests from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III; Rey Auditory Verbal Leaning Test; Rey Complex Figure Test; Trail Making Test; demographic factors (age, sex, years licensed); and injury-related factors (duration of posttraumatic amnesia; time postinjury). RESULTS: Participants who failed the driving assessment did worse on measures of attention, visual memory, and executive processing; however, cognitive tests were weak correlates (r values <0.3) and poor predictors of the driving assessment. Posttraumatic amnesia duration mediated by time postinjury was the strongest predictor of the driving assessment-that is, participants with more severe TBIs had later driving assessments and were more likely to fail. CONCLUSION: Cognitive tests are not reliable predictors of the on-road driving assessment outcome. Traumatic brain injury severity may be a better predictor of on-road driving; however, further research is needed to identify the best predictors of driving behavior after TBI.