InterOrganizational practice committee guidance/recommendation for models of care during the novel coronavirus pandemic.

Objective: The Inter Organizational Practice Committee (IOPC) convened a workgroup to develop guidance on models to provide neuropsychological (NP) care during the COVID-19 pandemic while minimizing risks of novel coronavirus transmission as lockdown orders are lifted and ambulatory clinical services resume.Method: A collaborative panel of experts from major professional organizations developed provisional guidance for models of neuropsychological practice during the pandemic. The stakeholders included the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology/American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology, the National Academy of Neuropsychology, Society of Clinical neuropsychology (Division 40) of the American Psychological Association, the American Board of Professional Neuropsychology, and the American Psychological Association Services, Inc.Results: This guidance reviews the risks and benefits of conducting NP exams in several ways, including standard in-person, mitigated in-person, in-clinic teleneuropsychology (TeleNP), and in-home TeleNP. Strategies are provided for selecting the most appropriate model for a given patient, taking into account four levels of patient risk stratification, level of community risk and the concept of stepped models of care. Links are provided to governmental agency and professional organization resources as well as an outline and discussion of essential infection mitigation processes based on commonalities across recommendations from diverse federal, state, local, and professional organization recommendations.Conclusion: This document provides recommendations and guidance with analysis of the risks relative to the benefits of various models of neuropsychological care during the COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations may be revised as circumstances evolve, with updates posted continuously on the IOPC website (https://iopc.online/).

Pre-appointment online assessment of patient complexity: Towards a personalized model of neuropsychological assessment.

Recent events such as the global pandemic of COVID-19 have challenged neuropsychologists to scale up their capacity to conduct portions of their assessment remotely. While more complex patients will likely continue to require on-site, office-based interaction and assessment, the current emergency-based expansion of online and telehealth evaluation practices may ultimately lay the groundwork for more routine, online assessment of patients with less complex presentations in the future. To this end, the current study evaluated a pre-appointment, online methodology for differentiating referred pediatric patients based upon the scope and severity of their caregiver-reported adaptive, academic, attentional, behavioral, and emotional impairment. Prior to on-site assessment, parents/caregivers of 2197 children (Mean age = 10.0y, range = 4-19y, 62% male) completed an online developmental history form screening for symptoms of adaptive, attentional, learning, affective, and behavioral impairment; 71% of those children eventually underwent assessment. Using latent class analysis, the data supported a reproducible 4-class model consisting of groups of children at increased risk for: 1) severe multi-domain dysfunction; the "High Complexity" group, 30%, 2) behavioral-affective (but not academic) dysregulation; the "Behavioral Focus" group, 13%, 3) academic (but not behavioral-affective) problems; the "Academic and Inattention" group, 37%, and 4) patients with minimal clinical complexity; the "Low Complexity" group, 20%. Comparison of pre-visit classification with day-of-assessment standardized test scores supported the validity of patient subtypes. Moving forward, pre-appointment clarification of patient complexity may support efficient patient triage with regard to assessment modality (e.g., on-site or online) and length of appointment (e.g., comprehensive or targeted).

Technology meets tradition: a hybrid model for implementing digital tools in neuropsychology.

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the provision of mental health care services and the ability to provide neuropsychological evaluations. The inability to conduct traditional evaluations has left neuropsychologists with the unprecedented task of determining how to modify existing paradigms while balancing the need to provide services and adhere to safety parameters. The COVID-19 literature suggests clinicians are modifying their evaluations based on the following models: (1) continuing to administer in-person evaluations; (2) discontinuing all evaluations due to issues related to standardization, test security, and patient-specific characteristics; (3) conducting virtual evaluations; and/or (4) adopting a hybrid model incorporating both traditional and technology-based modalities. Given the challenges with models 1-3, along with the modifications in telehealth guidelines and insurance reimbursement rates, neuropsychologists are more poised than ever to solidify the implementation of a hybrid model that lasts beyond COVID-19. We introduce the term Hybrid Neuropsychology, a model for the future of neuropsychological evaluations that includes three Action Items: (1) building a technology-based practice; (2) integrating data science; and (3) engaging with innovators in other fields. Hybrid Neuropsychology will enable clinicians to effectively modernize their practice, improve health care equity, and ensure neuropsychology secures its place in a technology-based world.

InterOrganizational practice committee recommendations/guidance for teleneuropsychology (TeleNP) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: The Inter Organizational Practice Committee (IOPC) convened a workgroup to provide rapid guidance about teleneuropsychology (TeleNP) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.Method: A collaborative panel of experts from major professional organizations developed provisional guidance for neuropsychological practice during the pandemic. The stakeholders included the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology/American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology, the National Academy of Neuropsychology, Division 40 of the American Psychological Association, the American Board of Professional Neuropsychology, and the American Psychological Association Services, Inc. The group reviewed literature, collated federal, regional and state regulations and information from insurers, and surveyed practitioners to identify best practices.Results: Literature indicates that TeleNP may offer reliable and valid assessments, but clinicians need to consider limitations, develop new informed consent procedures, report modifications of standard procedures, and state limitations to diagnostic conclusions and recommendations. Specific limitations affect TeleNP assessments of older adults, younger children, individuals with limited access to technology, and individuals with other individual, cultural, and/or linguistic differences. TeleNP may be contraindicated or infeasible given specific patient characteristics, circumstances, and referral questions. Considerations for billing TeleNP services are offered with reservations that clinicians must verify procedures independently. Guidance about technical issues and "tips" for TeleNP procedures are provided.Conclusion: This document provides provisional guidance with links to resources and established guidelines for telepsychology. Specific recommendations extend these practices to TeleNP. These recommendations may be revised as circumstances evolve, with updates posted continuously at OPC.online.

Validity of teleneuropsychology for older adults in response to COVID-19: A systematic and critical review.

Objective: Due to the recent COVID-19 pandemic, the field of neuropsychology must rapidly evolve to incorporate assessments delivered via telehealth, or teleneuropsychology (TNP). Given the increasing demand to deliver services electronically due to public health concerns, it is important to review available TNP validity studies. This systematic review builds upon the work of Brearly and colleagues' (2017) meta-analysis and provides an updated review of the literature, with special emphasis on test-level validity data.Method: Using similar methodology as Brearly and colleagues (2017) three internet databases (PubMed, EBSCOhost, PsycINFO) were searched for relevant articles published since 2016. Studies with older adults (aged 65+) who underwent face-to-face and TNP assessments in a counterbalanced cross-over design were included. After review, 10 articles were retained. Combined with nine articles from Brearly's analysis, a total of 19 studies were included in the systematic review.Results: Retained studies included samples from 5 different countries, various ethnic/cultural backgrounds, and diverse diagnostic populations. Test-level analysis suggests there are cognitive screeners (MMSE, MoCA), language tests (BNT, Letter Fluency), attention/working memory tasks (Digit Span Total), and memory tests (HVLT-R) with strong support for TNP validity. Other measures are promising but lack sufficient support at this time. Few TNP studies have done in-home assessments and most studies rely on a PC or laptop.Conclusions: Overall, there appears to be good support for TNP assessments in older adults. Challenges to TNP in the current climate are discussed. Finally, a provisional outline of viable TNP procedures used in our clinic is provided.

Perspectives on neuropsychology and clinical care in paediatric and adolescent medicine.

As a child and adolescent neuropsychology service based within a paediatric psychology team at a large teaching hospital, we meet children and young people across the age range who experience cognitive impairment as a result of long-term health conditions or traumatic brain injury. We have a remit of providing a neuropsychological assessment and report. Typically, a neuropsychology report includes recommendations for home and for school. However, research suggests that their uptake is variable and depends on the understanding and resources of families and school systems. As a stretched service, we have very limited capacity to follow the work through to the extent that we might like. Therefore, we are always seeking effective ways to support the ongoing adaptation and implementation of the assessment recommendations in the child's various day-to-day contexts. We address both the cognitive functioning and the psychological well-being of the child as a unified whole. Drawing on systemic ideas influences our communications with children, families, schools and the medical teams in ways which help bridge the gap between hospital-based assessment and everyday life. This article describes how we are integrating our systemic and neurodevelopmental perspectives to make the assessment and the findings a meaningful intervention in themselves. We consider ways of sharing neuropsychology findings which promote the child's psychological well-being in their different contexts: hospital, home, school, community and culture.

American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology consensus conference statement on uniform labeling of performance test scores.

Objectives: Descriptive labels of performance test scores are a critical component of communicating outcomes of neuropsychological and psychological evaluations. Yet, no universally accepted system exists for assigning qualitative descriptors to scores in specific ranges. In addition, the definition and use of the term "impairment" lacks specificity and consensus. Consequently, test score labels and the denotation of impairment are inconsistently applied by clinicians, creating confusion among consumers of neuropsychological services, including referral sources, trainees, colleagues, and the judicial system. To reduce this confusion, experts in clinical and forensic neuropsychological and psychological assessment convened in a consensus conference at the 2018 Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN). The goals of the consensus conference were to recommend (1) a system of qualitative labels to describe results from performance-based tests with normal and non-normal distributions and (2) a definition of impairment and its application in individual case determinations. Results: The goals of the consensus conference were met resulting in specific recommendations for the application of uniform labels for performance tests and for the definition of impairment, which are described in this paper. In addition, included in this consensus statement is a description of the conference process and the rationales for these recommendations. Conclusions/Importance: This consensus conference is the first formal attempt by the professional neuropsychological community to make recommendations for uniform performance test score labels and to advance a consistent definition of impairment. Using uniform descriptors and terms will reduce confusion and enhance report comprehensibility by the consumers of our reports as well as our trainees and colleagues.

Evolution of clinical neuropsychology: Four challenges.

Quantitative and evidence-based approaches fail to capture "the whole person," neglect the important contributions of nonquantitative variables to understanding behavior, and have limitations when assessing individuals who fall outside traditional normative groups. The emphasis on quantitative and evidence-based practices is one challenge facing the profession. The lack of consensual definitions for various domains of interest is a second challenge, because it hinders research, poses communication challenges, and impedes the accumulation of knowledge about human behavior. A third challenge the profession faces is an overemphasis on the biological basis of behavior. Finally, the forth challenge is the impact of technology on practice. Since the 1970s, there has been a rapid advance in our ability to investigate the brain, resulting in a significant increase of information about brain functioning, making it difficult for clinicians to stay abreast of changes in the field. Advances in technology have resulted in "assessments" being completed by nonpsychologists. To place these and related challenges in context, a brief review of the history of assessment and efforts to investigate brain functioning will be presented. It is suggested that failure to meet these challenges will contribute to the demise of the profession. Suggestions for meeting these challenges are offered.

Why are neuropsychologists so reluctant to embrace modern assessment techniques?

OBJECTIVE: Computerized tests and use of the internet offer many opportunities for improvement of neuropsychological assessment over traditional paper-and-pencil tests. Nevertheless, many clinical neuropsychologists are conservative in their choice of tests when assessing patients; the majority still seems to prefer using well-established paper-and-pencil tests. METHOD: This deliberately one-sided opinion paper discusses several reasons that may explain the reluctance to embrace modern techniques. These reasons are of a psychometric, technical, theoretical, and strategic nature. CONCLUSIONS: A range of issues regarding each of these reasons need to be solved before digital assessment techniques can fulfill their promises. In the meantime, it seems wise to be cautious, and to be critical in adopting the digital assessment techniques.

Digital neuropsychology: Challenges and opportunities at the intersection of science and software.

OBJECTIVE: Digital devices are now broadly accessible and have the capacity to measure aspects of human behavior with high precision and accuracy, in a standardized manner. The purpose of this article is to characterize opportunities and barriers for modern digital neuropsychology, particularly those that are unique to digital assessment. METHODS: We provide a critical overview of the state-of-the-art in digital neuropsychology, focusing on personal digital devices. RESULTS: We identify three major barriers associated with digital neuropsychology, which affect both the interpretation of test scores and test norms: (1) variability in the perceptual, motor and cognitive demands of the same test across digital device classes (e.g. personal computer, tablet and smartphone); (2) hardware and software variability between devices within the same class that affect stimulus presentation and measurement and (3) rapid changes over time in hardware, software and device ownership, which can lead to rapid obsolescence of particular tests and test norms. We offer specific recommendations to address these barriers and outline new opportunities to understand and measure neuropsychological functioning over time and in everyday environments. CONCLUSIONS: Digital neuropsychology provides new approaches for measuring and monitoring neuropsychological functioning, informed by an understanding of the limitations and potential of digital technology.

Unconscious arithmetic: Assessing the robustness of the results reported by Karpinski, Briggs, and Yale (2018).

In 2012, a study by Sklar et al. reported that participants could solve invisible subtractions. This notion of unconscious arithmetic has been influential because it challenges current theories of consciousness. In 2016, Karpinski et al. published a direct replication reporting evidence for unconscious addition rather than subtraction. About a year later, the study was retracted due to a computation error in the analysis pipeline. After this error was corrected, no evidence for unconscious addition nor subtraction was obtained. Recently, Karpinski et al. republished the study by applying the exclusion criteria used in Sklar et al. The reanalysis found weak evidence for unconscious subtraction. To assess the robustness of these results, we examine how sensitive the results are to data analytic decisions. We outline a set of 250 analyses that we consider justified to perform. We show that none of the analyses indicates evidence for unconscious subtraction.

Role of clinical neuropsychology in deep brain stimulation: Review of the literature and considerations for clinicians.

Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) is an effective surgical therapy for several neurological movement disorders. The clinical neuropsychologist has a well-established role in the neuropsychological evaluation and selection of surgical candidates. In this article, we argue that the clinical neuropsychologist's role is much broader, when considered in relation to applied psychologists' core competencies. We consider the role of the clinical neuropsychologist in DBS in relation to: assessment, formulation, evaluation and research, intervention or implementation, and communication. For each competence the relevant evidence-base was reviewed. Clinical neuropsychology has a vital role in presurgical assessment of cognitive functioning and psychological, and emotional and behavioral difficulties. Formulation is central to the selection of surgical candidates and crucial to intervention planning. Clinical neuropsychology has a well-established role in postsurgical assessment of cognitive functioning and psychological, emotional, and behavioral outcomes, which is fundamental to evaluation on an individual and service level. The unique contribution clinical neuropsychology makes to pre- and postsurgical interventions is also highlighted. Finally, we discuss how clinical neuropsychology can promote clear and effective communication with patients and between professionals.

Mild cognitive impairment and prospective memory: translating the evidence into neuropsychological practice.

OBJECTIVE: There has been a recent rapid development of research characterizing prospective memory performance in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in older age. However, this body of literature remains largely separated from routine clinical practice in neuropsychology. Furthermore, there is emerging evidence of effective interventions to improve prospective memory performance. Therefore, our objective in this article was to offer a clinical neuropsychological perspective on the existing research in order to facilitate the translation of the evidence-base into clinical practice. METHOD: By conducting a critical review of the existing research related to prospective memory and MCI, we highlight how this data can be introduced into clinical practice, either within diagnostic assessment or clinical management. CONCLUSIONS: Prospective memory is impaired in older adults with MCI, with a pattern of performance that helps with differential diagnosis from healthy aging. Clinical neuropsychologists are encouraged to add prospective memory assessment to their toolbox for diagnostic evaluation of clients with MCI. Preliminary findings of prospective memory interventions in MCI are promising, but more work is required to determine how different approaches translate to increasing independence in everyday life.

Conducting neuropsychological assessment with transgender individuals.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of helpful clinical practices when working with transgender adult individuals. METHOD: While the number of openly transgender individuals appears to be growing with society's increased acceptance and awareness, many neuropsychologists have had few opportunities to gain experience with this patient population. In this article, we review the existing literature as it relates to clinical neuropsychological practice. RESULTS: We describe important terminology, ideals for creating an environment of respect, and how existing clinical guidelines for transgender individuals may apply to neuropsychology. In addition, we review the primary steps in the assessment process and provide a set of principles and recommendations for conducting neuropsychological assessments with transgender patients. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of guidance in the field for working with transgender individuals. This article represents a step forward in the dialog and we look forward to future research that develops appropriate normative information, increases understanding of psychosocial factors, and better appreciates the range of hormonal influences for transgender individuals.

Developing a cultural context for conducting a neuropsychological evaluation with a culturally diverse client: the ECLECTIC framework.

OBJECTIVE: With the increasing diversification of the American population, the discipline of neuropsychology is challenged to develop appropriate tools and conceptual models to meet its evolving client base. Thus far, the focus has been on developing appropriate tests and norms to obtain accurate testing data. By contrast, far less attention has been paid to the contextual impact of culture on an evaluation. This paper attempts to address this shortcoming. METHODS: This manuscript introduces the ECLECTIC framework for conceptualizing different facets of culture pertinent for understanding a culturally diverse client when conducting a neuropsychological evaluation. Individual components of the framework (E: education and literacy; C: culture and acculturation; L: language; E: economics; C: communication; T: testing situation: comfort and motivation; I: intelligence conceptualization; and C: context of immigration) are introduced and potential biases to fairness in testing are described. In this manner, the framework specifies how individual facets of culture can impact neuropsychological test performance. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical implementation of the framework will be illustrated with a case sample. Strengths and weaknesses of the framework are discussed as well as recommendations for implementation.

[Formula: see text]Congenital heart disease: A primer for the pediatric neuropsychologist.

Congenital heart disease (CHD) affects millions of people worldwide, including over one million children in the United States. Approximately 25% of children born with CHD require intensive surgical intervention within the first year of life. Despite improved rates of survival into adulthood - rates that exceed 90% in the modern era - children and adolescents with CHD remain at risk for neurological injury and a range of neurobehavioral and psychosocial challenges that pose a threat to quality of life across the lifespan. Consequently, as experts in both clinical psychology and brain development, neuropsychologists are becoming increasingly involved in cardiac follow-up and monitoring to promote optimal developmental outcomes. The primary objective of this paper is to provide an evidence-based, clinically-oriented primer on CHD for pediatric neuropsychologists working with this growing population of survivors. Following an introduction to current standard-of-care guidelines for managing children and adolescents with CHD, we present an overview of brain development within the context of CHD, review neuropsychological outcomes, examine factors influencing variability in outcomes, and discuss implications and strategies for clinical assessment.

Neuropsychological feedback services improve quality of life and social adjustment.

OBJECTIVE: In more recent years, studies have begun to examine levels of satisfaction of individuals or family members of individuals who undergo neuropsychological evaluation. However, to date there have been only a handful of formal studies that have specifically examined the role and contribution of neuropsychological assessment in patient care and management. This study sought to examine one specific component of neuropsychological assessment, namely the impact of patient feedback regarding neuropsychological testing on patient outcome. METHOD: Participants included 218 patients who were recruited from a neuropsychological outpatient clinic at a Midwest academic medical center. This study examined potential differences between outcome measures for patients who attended feedback sessions versus those who did not receive direct feedback. RESULTS: Results indicated that compared with the No Feedback group, the Feedback group reported greater improvement in quality of life, increased understanding of their condition, and an increased ability to cope with their condition at follow-up. There were no significant demographic differences between the Feedback and No Feedback group. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that there is benefit for the individuals who chose to engage in feedback sessions. Feedback sessions can be utilized to assist with integral decision-making processes and assisting in treatment planning among other areas. It also allows time for patients and family members to discuss their concerns regarding important test findings and recommendations. Given the current climate of value-based services and clinical outcomes, the findings from this study lend support to the utility of neuropsychological assessments and, in particular, the role of feedback within neuropsychological evaluations.

The stakeholders' project in neuropsychological report writing: a survey of neuropsychologists' and referral sources' views of neuropsychological reports.

OBJECTIVE: Though some neuropsychological groups have proposed criteria and suggestions for clinical report writing there has never been professional consensus or accepted published guidelines on how to write reports. Given the paucity of guidelines and the evolving practice climate, we sought to survey neuropsychologists and referral source stakeholders to understand current report writing practices. METHOD: The data were collected in two SurveyMonkey surveys via professional list servs, email, and LinkedIn clinical interest groups. RESULTS: Results of the survey indicate many neuropsychologists spend multiple hours writing reports that they believe will not be read completely by stakeholders. A striking 73% of referral sources reported slow turnaround time of neuropsychological reports negatively affected their patient care. Referral sources reported they value the diagnosis/impression and recommendations sections the most; in contrast, they did not find the history, behavioral observations, emotional functioning, or descriptions of cognitive domains sections as useful. CONCLUSIONS: The survey findings highlight the disjuncture between what neuropsychologists typically do in their practice of report writing versus what they believe is useful for patients and referral sources. The survey also highlights differences between writing practices of neuropsychologists and what referral sources identify as the most valuable aspects of reports to assist them in caring for their patients.

Toward generally accepted forensic assessment practices among clinical neuropsychologists: a survey of professional practice and common test use.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated professional practice and common test use among clinical neuropsychologists engaging in forensic assessment. METHOD: Doctorate-level psychologists active in the practice of neuropsychology and on the INS and NAN membership listings (n = 502) were surveyed about their demographics, professional practice, and common test use. Participants who reported engaging in forensic practice (n = 255) were further surveyed about their forensic practice. RESULTS: Forensic participants were more likely to be male and Caucasian, and reported higher ages, more years of professional experience, and a higher prevalence of board certification. While characteristics of their professional and forensic practice varied, forensic participants reported spending most of their professional time conducting neuropsychological assessments with adult clients in a private or group practice setting, focusing on civil referrals and civil legal questions involving older adult issues, developmental issues, head injury, and psychiatric issues. Common test use across neuropsychological assessment domains is presented for board-certified forensic participants (n = 77). An examination of these results reveals that the current pattern of test use is similar to the results of a more general survey of neuropsychological test use. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide insight into the practice of forensic neuropsychological assessment, and further establish the admissibility of neuropsychological evidence in the United States legal system. Results will be useful for clinical neuropsychologists, field leaders, and legal professionals hoping to gain insight into the role of clinical neuropsychology in civil and criminal legal decision-making.

Performance validity testing in neuropsychology: a clinical guide, critical review, and update on a rapidly evolving literature.

OBJECTIVE: Over the past two decades, there has been much research on measures of response bias and myriad measures have been validated in a variety of clinical and research samples. This critical review aims to guide clinicians through the use of performance validity tests (PVTs) from test selection and administration through test interpretation and feedback. METHOD/RESULTS: Recommended cutoffs and relevant test operating characteristics are presented. Other important issues to consider during test selection, administration, interpretation, and feedback are discussed including order effects, coaching, impact on test data, and methods to combine measures and improve predictive power. When interpreting performance validity measures, neuropsychologists must use particular caution in cases of dementia, low intelligence, English as a second language/minority cultures, or low education. CONCLUSIONS: PVTs provide valuable information regarding response bias and, under the right circumstances, can provide excellent evidence of response bias. Only after consideration of the entire clinical picture, including validity test performance, can concrete determinations regarding the validity of test data be made.