Revising the Pragmatics Profile of Everyday Communication Skills for traumatic brain injury: An international Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Assessment tools that assess pragmatic skills in adults with a mild-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) are hard to access, not person-centred and have a high risk of clinician bias. The Pragmatics Profile is an informant report tool that was originally designed to assess pragmatic skills in people with a developmental disability. AIMS: The aim of this study was to seek consensus from a panel of experts and create a version of the Pragmatics Profile for the TBI population. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: A three-round modified Delphi methodology panel of 13 experts were invited to comment anonymously on the suitability of each question from the Pragmatics Profile modified for those with TBI until ≥ 80% agreement was reached. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: The Pragmatics Profile (TBI) included 66 questions that achieved consensus after three rounds of the Delphi panel. Qualitative analysis illuminated themes relating to adults with TBI and the need to include contextual factors. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The outcome of this project was a revised version of the Pragmatics Profile which is suitable for adults with a mild-severe TBI, informed by experts and freely available online. Future research exploring the tool's utility and acceptability is the next step in its evaluation. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Assessment of the everyday functional use of language is challenging but vital. This is particularly true for those who have traumatic brain injury (TBI) where the communication outcomes can be highly variable and may include difficulties with conversational turn-taking, topic maintenance and reading social cues. There are limited tools available to clinicians and those tend to be rating scales or checklists which have a high risk of clinician bias. Available tools have a limited ability to capture the individual's personal social communication goals. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study created an online Pragmatics Profile (PP) for TBI based on experts' opinions. This paper details the themes that emerged during the process of revising the PP for those with TBI. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The PP-TBI adds to the toolkit for speech and language therapists working with people with TBI. It meets recent recommendations in the literature to create an interview-based tool. The versatility of an online tool combined with revised input from a panel of experts increases the likelihood that clinicians will utilise this tool. Given the long-term use of the original PP by clinicians for almost 30 years and a focus on personalised care, the format and approach are also likely to be acceptable to clinicians.

Story Grammar Analyses Capture Discourse Improvement in the First 2 Years Following a Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

PURPOSE: Narration within a story grammar framework requires speakers to organize characters and events logically. Despite abundant research characterizing narrative deficits following a traumatic brain injury (TBI), the evolution of narrative story grammar over the first 2 years post-TBI has rarely been explored. This study analyzed story grammar in complex narratives of adults with and without severe TBI to (a) examine between-group differences and (b) investigate longitudinal changes over the first 2 years post-TBI. METHOD: Story grammar analyses of Cinderella narratives from 57 participants with TBI and 57 participants with no brain injury yielded measures of productivity (total number of episodes, total number of story grammar elements), elaboration (total number of elaborated-complete episodes, mean number of episodic elements per episode), and completeness (total number of incomplete episodes). Mann-Whitney U tests compared measures across groups; generalized estimating equation (GEE) models identified predictors of change, including recovery time (3, 6, 9, 12, and 24 months post-TBI) and demographic/injury-related characteristics. RESULTS: Between-group differences were statistically significant for all productivity and elaboration measures at 3, 6, and 9 months post-TBI; one productivity measure and one elaboration measure at 12 months; and none of the measures at 24 months. GEE models showed significant improvements in all productivity and elaboration measures over the first 24 months post-TBI, with educational attainment and duration of posttraumatic amnesia affecting recovery. Incomplete episodes only showed between-group differences at 12 months and did not capture recovery. CONCLUSION: Productivity and elaboration are key story grammar variables that (a) differentiate complex narration in individuals with and without severe TBI and (b) capture narrative improvements over the first 2 years post-TBI. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25148999.

Casual conversations between individuals with traumatic brain injury and their friends.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To investigate casual conversations with friends following severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: Nine participants with severe TBI were matched by age, gender and education to nine control participants. Each participant also invited a friend to partake in the study. Participants were recorded engaging in a brief casual conversation with a friend. The resulting discourse was analysed using Exchange Structure Analysis (ESA). Rates of information giving, information requesting and communication repair and negotiation were collated. Non-parametric statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: Participants with and without TBI obtained similar rates of information giving and information requesting. The friends of the participants with TBI produced significantly lower rates of information giving measures when compared to the controls, but achieved comparable rates of information requesting and communication repair and negotiation measures. Participants with TBI were observed to produce tangential language and to have difficulties identifying communication breakdown, asking questions and engaging in conversational joking. CONCLUSIONS: People with TBI are able to engage in casual conversations with friends in a similar way to matched controls. Friends of people with TBI are often restricted in contributing information in conversations. Further research is needed to specify the facilitative and restrictive communication behaviours so that they may be translated to clinical practise.