2 results
74 The Impact of Motoric Dysfunction on Neuropsychological Test Performance Within an Electrical Injury Sample
- Maximillian A Obolsky, Humza Khan, Zachary J Resch, Jessica L Paxton, Jason R Soble, Joseph W Fink, Neil H Pliskin
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 29 / Issue s1 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 December 2023, pp. 67-68
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Victims of electrical injury (EI) often experience injuries to the peripheral nervous system and neuromuscular damage that may diminish motor function, such as flexibility/dexterity. These difficulties may continue after rehabilitation due to the reorganization of muscle afferent projections during peripheral nerve regeneration. Therefore, understanding how patients with a history of thermal burn injuries perform on motoric measures is necessary to explain the impact neuromuscular damage has on both motor and non-motor tests of cognition. However, no studies have examined the impact of motor functioning on cognition in patients who experienced thermal and electrical injuries compared to an electrical shock injury. This study explored the impact of motor dysfunction and psychiatric distress measured by depression severity on psychomotor speed and executive test performances among EI patients with and without thermal burn injuries.
Participants and Methods:This cross-sectional study consisted of EI patients undergoing an outpatient neuropsychological evaluation, including tests of motor dexterity (Grooved Pegboard [GP]), psychomotor speed (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV Coding, Trail Making Test [TMT] Part A), and executive functioning (Stroop Color and Word Test [SCWT] Color-Word trial, TMT Part B). The sample was 83% male and 17% female, 88% White, 3% Black, 5% Hispanic, and 2% other race/ethnicity, with a mean age of 43.9 years (SD=11.36), mean education of 12.9 years (SD=2.05), and mean depression severity of 20.05 (SD=12.59) on the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). Exclusion criteria were: 1) injury history of moderate-to-severe head trauma, 2) >2 performance validity test failures, and 3) any amputation of the upper extremity. Regression analyses included GP T-Scores for dominant hand and BDI-II total score as independent variables and neuropsychological normative test data as dependent variables.
Results:Among validly performing patients with EI (n=86), regression analyses revealed GP performance accounted for significant variance (R2 =.153-.169) on all neuropsychological measures. Among EI patients with burn injuries (n=50), regression analyses revealed GP performance accounted for significant variance (R2 =.197-.266) on all neuropsychological measures. Among EI patients without burn injuries (n=36), analyses revealed that neither GP performance nor BDI-II severity accounted for significant variance across the neurocognitive tests (R2=.056-.142). Furthermore, among EI patients with burn injuries and the total sample, regression analyses revealed depression severity negatively predicted GP performance (R2 =.099-.13), however, in patients without burn injuries, depression did not predict GP performance (R2 =.052).
Conclusions:Overall, results showed that GP performance is a significant predictor of neurocognitive performance on both motor and non-motor measures in EI patients with burn injuries. Therefore, among EI patients with burn injuries, GP performance may have potential utility as an early indicator of injury severity, considering that it predicts neuropsychological test performance on measures of psychomotor speed and executive functioning. Lastly, depression predicted GP performance within the burn injury sample illustrating that psychological distress may negatively impact motor functionality.
21 A Comparison of the Memory and Non-Memory Based Performance Validity Measures for Detecting Invalid Neuropsychological Test Performance among Individuals with and without Memory Impairment
- Humza M Khan, Maximillian A Obolsky, Gabriel P Ovsiew, Jason R Soble, Zachary J Resch
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 29 / Issue s1 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 December 2023, pp. 703-704
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Few to no studies have directly compared the relative classification accuracies of the memory-based (Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised Recognition Discrimination [BVMT-R RD] and Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test Forced Choice [RAVLT FC]) and non-memory based (Reliable Digit Span [RDS] and Stroop Color and Word Test Word Reading trial [SCWT WR]) embedded performance validity tests (PVTs). This study’s main objective was to evaluate their relative classification accuracies head-to-head, as well as examine how their psychometric properties may vary among subgroups with and without genuine memory impairment.
Participants and Methods:This cross-sectional study included 293 adult patients who were administered the BVMT-R, WAIS-IV Digit Span, RAVLT and SCWT during outpatient neuropsychological evaluation at a Midwestern academic medical center. The overall sample was 58.0% female, 36.2% non-Hispanic White, 41.3% non-Hispanic Black, 15.7% Hispanic, 4.8% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 2.0% other, with a mean age of 45.7 (SD=15.8) and a mean education of 13.9 years (SD=2.8). Three patients had missing data, resulting in a final sample size of 290. Two hundred thirty-three patients (80%) were classified as having valid neurocognitive performance and 57 (20%) as having invalid neurocognitive performance based on performance across four independent, criterion PVTs (i.e., Test of Malingering Memory Trial 1, Word Choice Test, Dot Counting Test, Medical Symptom Validity Test). Of those with valid neurocognitive performance, 76 (48%) patients were considered as having genuine memory impairment through a memory composite band score (T<37 for (RAVLT Delayed Recall T-score + BVMT-R Delay Recall T-score/2).
Results:The average memory composite band score for valid neurocognitive scores was T = 49.63 as compared to T = 27.57 for genuine memory impairment individuals. Receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve analyses yielded significant areas under the curve (AUCs=.79-.87) for all four validity indices (p’s < .001). When maintaining acceptable specificity (91%-95%), all validity indices demonstrated acceptable yet varied sensitivities (35%-65%). Among the subgroup with genuine memory impairment, ROC curve analyses yielded significantly lower AUCs (.64-.69) for three validity indices (p’s < .001), except RDS (AUC=.644). At acceptable specificity (88%-93%), they yielded significantly lower sensitivities across indices (19%-39%). In the current sample, RAVLT FC and BVMT-R RD had the largest changes in sensitivities, with 19% and 26% sensitivity/90%-92% specificity at optimal cut-scores of <10 and <2, respectively, for individuals with memory impairment, compared to 65% and 61% sensitivity/94% specificity at optimal cut-scores of <13 and <4, respectively, for those without memory impairment.
Conclusions:Of the four validity scales, memory-based embedded PVTs yielded higher sensitivities while maintaining acceptable specificity compared to non-memory based embedded PVTs. However, they were also susceptible to the greatest declines in sensitivity among the subgroup with genuine memory impairment. As a result, careful consideration should be given to using memory-based embedded PVTs among individuals with clinically significant memory impairment based on other sources of information (e.g., clinical history, behavioral observation).