Psychometric properties of light touch-pressure somatosensory measures in adults with neurological disorders: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To critically appraise the psychometric properties of light touch-pressure somatosensory assessments to provide guidance for tool selection for research or clinical purposes. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycInfo were searched for research indexed from January 1990-November 2022. English language and human subject filters were applied. "Somatosensation", "psychometric property", and "nervous system-based health condition" search terms were combined. Grey literature and manual searches were conducted to ensure thoroughness. REVIEW METHODS: The reliability, construct validity, and/or measurement error of light touch-pressure assessments was reviewed in adult populations with neurological disorders. Reviewers individually extracted and managed data including patient demographics, assessment characteristics, statistical methods, and psychometric properties. Methodological quality of results was evaluated using an adapted version of the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist. RESULTS: Thirty-three of 1938 articles were included for review. Fifteen light touch-pressure assessments demonstrated good or excellent reliability. Further, five of those 15 assessments achieved adequate validity and one of the 15 assessments achieved adequate measurement error. Over 80% of the summarized study ratings were determined to be of low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: We recommend using electrical perceptual tests, the Semmes-Weinstein Monofilaments, the Graded and Redefined Assessment of Strength, Sensibility, and Prehension, and the Moving Touch Pressure Test given that they demonstrated good to excellent results in three psychometric properties. No other assessment achieved adequate ratings in more than two psychometric properties. This review highlights a fundamental need to develop sensory assessments that are reliable, valid, and sensitive to change.

Beyond surviving: A scoping review of collaborative care models to inform the future of post-discharge trauma care.

ABSTRACT: Trauma centers demonstrate an impressive ability to save lives, as reflected by inpatient survival rates of over 95% in the United States. Nevertheless, we fail to allocate sufficient effort and resources to ensure that survivors and their families receive the necessary care and support after leaving the trauma center. The objective of this scoping review is to systematically map the research on collaborative care models (CCM) that have been put forward to improve trauma survivorship. Of 833 articles screened, we included 16 studies evaluating eight collaborative care programs, predominantly in the U.S. The majority of the programs offered care coordination and averaged 9-months in duration. Three-fourths of the programs incorporated a mental health provider within their primary team. Observed outcomes were diverse: some models showed increased engagement (e.g., Center for Trauma Survivorship, trauma quality-of-life follow-up clinic), while others presented mixed mental health outcomes and varied results on pain and healthcare utilization. The findings of this study indicate that collaborative interventions may be effective in mental health screening, PTSD and depression management, effective referrals, and improving patient satisfaction with care. A consensus on core elements and cost-effectiveness of CCMs is necessary to set the standard for comprehensive care in post-trauma recovery.