Assessments of coping after acquired brain injury: a systematic review of instrument conceptualization, feasibility, and psychometric properties.

OBJECTIVE: To identify measures of coping styles used by patients with acquired brain injury; to evaluate the conceptualization, feasibility, and psychometric properties of the instruments; and to provide guidance for researchers and clinicians in the choice of a suitable instrument. DESIGN: Systematic review. RESULTS: The search identified 47 instruments, of which 14 were selected. The instruments focused on dispositional coping, situation-specific coping, or domain-specific coping. Psychometric properties were scarcely investigated. The COPE stood out in terms of psychometric properties but had low feasibility. The brief COPE, Coping Scale for Adults-short form, and Utrecht Coping List stood out in terms of feasibility, and the available psychometric properties of these instruments were good. Only the Coping With Health Injuries and Problems was used as other report. CONCLUSION: Information on psychometric properties of coping instruments in acquired brain injury is scarcely available and limits the strength of our recommendations. For patients with mild injuries, we cautiously recommend the COPE and for patients with more severe injuries the brief COPE, Coping Scale for Adults-short form, Utrecht Coping List, and Coping With Health Injuries and Problems-other-report. Other instruments may be used to address particular issues such as coping with a specific stressful situation or illness.

Changes in self-reported pre- to postinjury coping styles in the first 3 years after traumatic brain injury and the effects on psychosocial and emotional functioning and quality of life.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the influence of self-reported preinjury coping on postinjury coping, psychosocial functioning, emotional functioning, and quality of life at 1 year following traumatic brain injury (TBI). SETTING: Inpatient hospital and community. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred seventy-four participants with TBI. DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal design. Participants were assessed at 5 time points: after emerging from posttraumatic amnesia, and at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months postinjury. MAIN MEASURES: Coping Scale for Adults-Short Version; Quality of Life Inventory; Sydney Psychosocial Reintegration Scale; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. RESULTS: High preinjury use of nonproductive coping style predicted high use of nonproductive coping, more anxiety, and lower psychosocial functioning at 1 year postinjury. Increased use of nonproductive coping and decreased use of productive coping predicted poorer psychosocial outcome at 1 year post-TBI. Use of both productive and nonproductive coping decreased in the first 6 to 12 months post-TBI relative to preinjury. Unlike productive coping, nonproductive coping reached preinjury levels within 3 years postinjury. CONCLUSION: The findings support identification of individuals at risk of relying on nonproductive coping and poorer psychosocial outcome following TBI. In addition, the results emphasize the need to implement timely interventions to facilitate productive coping and reduce the use of nonproductive coping in order to maximize favorable long-term psychosocial outcome.

Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation after acquired brain injury: a systematic review of content of treatment.

We reviewed all randomised trials on cognitive rehabilitation in order to determine the effective elements in terms of patients' and treatment characteristics, treatment goals and outcome. A total of 95 random controlled trials were included from January 1980 until August 2010 studying 4068 patients in total. Most studies had been conducted on language (n = 25), visuospatial functioning (n = 24), and memory (n = 14). Stroke patients were the commonest subjects (57%; overall mean age = 52.2, SD = 15.0 years). Of the interventions 39% were offered more than 12 months after onset and 23% were offered within two months of onset. The mean (SD) number of hours of treatment actually delivered was 4.1 (3.6) per week; treatment was mostly offered individually. No papers gave specific information on the expertise or competences of the staff involved. With 95 RCTs there is a large body of evidence to support the efficacy of cognitive rehabilitation, and the current study can serve as a database for clinicians and researchers. But most studies have given little information about the actual content of the treatment which makes it difficult to use the studies when making treatment decisions in daily clinical practice. We suggest developing an international checklist to make standardised description of non-pharmacological complex interventions possible.