Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T12:36:16.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Normative Versus Baseline Paradigms for Detecting Neuropsychological Impairment Following Sports-Related Concussion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 July 2015

Anton Dominic Hinton-Bayre
Anton Dominic Hinton-Bayre*
Affiliation:
School of Surgery, University of Western Australia
*
Address for correspondence: Anton D Hinton-Bayre, School of Surgery (M507), Ear Sciences Centre, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia6009. E-mail: anton.hb@hotmail.com. Phone: (+61 8) 9346 3735, Fax: (+61 8) 9346 2416.
Get access

Abstract

Objective: Obtaining baseline neuropsychological (NP) data to assist management of sports-related concussion has been considered the standard of care. The validity of this approach has been questioned, with suggestions that post-concussion testing alone will suffice. The present study compared the sensitivity of baseline and normative paradigms in the setting of sports-related concussion.

Method: Baseline NP data were collected for 194 Australian rugby league athletes on a brief battery of paper-and-pencil NP tests. During competition, 27 athletes sustaining concussion referred from a sports physician were retested within two days of injury. Twenty-six uninjured controls were assessed at similar intervals. The baseline paradigm was assessed using a reliable change index for pre- and post-concussion scores. The normative paradigm was assessed comparing the post-concussion score to a normative mean.

Results: The baseline paradigm was consistently more sensitive to negative change following concussion than the normative paradigm when using continuous data, despite reasonable agreement. However, when data were categorised as ‘impaired’ or ‘not-impaired’, using either 68% or 90% confidence intervals, the difference between paradigms failed to reach significance. Comparison of ROC curves for both paradigms found superior overall classification for one test and the composite score using baseline comparison data.

Conclusions: Despite being a time and resource intensive process, the baseline paradigm as a repeated-measures design may be more sensitive than the between-subjects design of the normative paradigm for detecting changes following concussion. Further work is required to determine the validity of normative assessment in sports-related concussion.

Keywords

Athleteneurocognitivemild traumatic brain injuryreliable change
Type
Articles
Information
Brain Impairment , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , September 2015 , pp. 80 - 89
Copyright
Copyright © Australasian Society for the Study of Brain Impairment 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cohen, R.J., Swerdlik, M., & Sturman, E. (2012). Psychological testing and assessment – An introduction to tests and measurement (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Crawford, J.R., & Howell, D.C. (1998). Regression equations in clinical neuropsychology: An evaluation of statistical methods for comparing predicted and obtained scores. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 20, 755–762.Google ScholarPubMed
Echemendia, R.J., Bruce, J.M., Bailey, C.M., Sanders, J.F., Arnett, P., & Vargas, G. (2012a). The utility of post-concussion neuropsychological data in identifying cognitive change following sports-related MTBI in the absence of baseline data. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 26, 1077–1091.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Echemendia, R.J., Iverson, G.L., McCrea, M., Broshek, D.K., Gioia, G.A., Sautter, S.W. . . . Barr, W.B. (2012b). Role of neuropsychologists in the evaluation and management of sports-related concussion: An inter-organization position statement. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 25, 1289–1294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbin, R.J., Schatz, P., & Covassin, T. (2011). One-year test-retest reliability of the online version of ImPACT in high school athletes. American Journal of Sports Medicine 39, 2319–2324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gardner, A., Shores, E.A., Batchelor, J., & Honan, C.A. (2012). Diagnostic efficiency of ImPACT and CogSport in concussed rugby union players who have not undergone baseline neurocognitive testing. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult 19, 90–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harmon, K.G., Drezner, J.A., Gammons, M., Guskiewicz, K.M., Halstead, M., Herring, S.A. . . . Roberts, W.O. (2013). American medical society for sports medicine position statement: Concussion in sport. British Journal of Sports Medicine 47, 15–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hinton-Bayre, A.D. (2010). Deriving reliable change statistics from test-retest normative data: Comparison of models and mathematical expressions. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 25, 244–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hinton-Bayre, A.D. (2012). Choice of reliable change model can alter decisions regarding neuropsychological impairment after sports-related concussion. Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine 22, 105–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holdnak, J.A., Drozdick, L.W., Weiss, L.G., & Iverson, G.L. (2013). WAIS-IV, WMS-IV, and ACS: Advanced clinical interpretation. Waltham, MA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Howell, D.C. (2010) Statistical methods for psychology (8 th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Iverson, G.L., Lovell, M.R., & Collins, M.W. (2003). Interpreting change on ImPACT following sports concussion. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 17, 460–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, N.S. & Truax, P. (1991) Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology 59, 12–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karr, J.E., Areshenkoff, C.N., & Garcia-Barrera, M.A. (2014). The neuropsychological outcomes of concussion: A systematic review of meta-analyses on the cognitive sequelae of mild traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychology 28, 321–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Louey, A.G., Cromer, J.A., Schembri, A.J., Darby, D.G., Maruff, P., Makdissi, M. . . . McCrory, P. (2014). Detecting cognitive impairment after concussion: Sensitivity of change from baseline and normative data methods using the cogsport/axon cognitive test battery. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 29, 432–441.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maassen, G.H. (2004). The standard error in the Jacobson and Truax reliable change index: The classic approach to the assessment of reliable change. Journal of International Neuropsychological Society 10, 888–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macciocchi, S.N., Barth, J.T., Alves, W., Rimel, R.W., & Jane, J.A. (1996). Neuropsychological functioning and recovery after mild head injury in collegiate athletes. Neurosurgery 39, 510–514.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Makdissi, M., Cantu, R.C., Johnston, K.M., McCrory, P., & Meewisse, W.H. (2013). The difficult concussion patient: What is the best approach to investigation and management of persistent (>10 days) postconcussive symptoms? British Journal of Sports Medicine 47, 308–313.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCrory, P., Meeuwisse, W., Aubry, M., Cantu, B., Dvorak, J., Echemendia, R.J. . . . Turner, M. (2013). Consensus statement on concussion in sport the 4th international conference on concussion in sport held in Zurich, November 2012. Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine 23, 89–117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCrory, P., Meeuwisse, W., Johnston, K., Dvorak, J., Aubry, M., Molloy, M., & Cantu, R.C. (2009). Consensus statement on concussion in sport 3rd international conference on concussion in sport held in Zurich, November 2008. Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine 19, 185–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McSweeny, A.J., Naugle, R.I., Chelune, G.J., & Luders, H. (1993). “T scores for change”: An illustration of a regression approach to depicting change in clinical neuropsychology. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 7, 300–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noble, J.M. & Hesdorffer, D.C. (2013). Sports-related concussions: A review of epidemiology, challenges in diagnosis, and potential risk factors. Neuropsychology Review 23, 273–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Randolph, C. (2011). Baseline neuropsychological testing in managing sports-related concussion: Does it modify risk? Current Sports Medicine Reports 10, 21–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Randolph, C. & Kirkwood, M.W. (2009). What are the real risks of sports-related concussion, and are they modifiable? Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 15, 512–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Resch, J.E., McCrea, M.A., & Cullum, C.M. (2013). Computerized neurocognitive testing in the management of sports-related concussion: An update. Neuropsychology Review 23, 335–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roebuck-Spencer, T.M., Vincent, A.S., Schlegel, R.E., & Gilliland, K. (2013). Evidence for added value of baseline testing in computer-based cognitive assessment. Journal of Athletic Training 48, 499–505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schatz, P. (2010). Long-term test-retest reliability of baseline cognitive assessments using ImPACT. American Journal of Sports Medicine 38, 47–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, J.D., Register-Mihalik, J.K., Mihalik, J.P., Kerr, Z.Y., & Guskiewicz, K.M. (2012). Identifying impairments after concussion: Normative data versus individualized baselines. Medicine Science and Sports in Exercise 44, 1621–1628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Speer, D.C. (1992). Clinically significant change: Jacobson and Truax (1991) revisited. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 60, 402–408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weir, J.P. (2005). Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 19, 231–240.Google ScholarPubMed