The Relationship Between Cognitive Functioning and Symptoms of Depression, Anxiety, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in Adults with a Traumatic Brain Injury: a Meta-Analysis

Emotional functioning in long COVID: Comparison to post-concussion syndrome using the Personality Assessment Inventory

Objective: Recent studies on Long COVID found that patients report prominent emotional distress and significant correlations between distress and cognitive performance have been identified, raising the question of how to manage or treat these issues. To understand psychological functioning in Long COVID further, this study examined personality responses on the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) to compare psychological functioning in a Long COVID group with a post-concussion syndrome (PCS) group, a syndrome with a significant psychological component. Participants and methods: Participants included 201 consecutive Long COVID outpatients (Mean age = 48.87 years, mean education = 14.82, 71.6% Female, 82.6% White) and a comparison group of 102 consecutively referred PCS outpatients (Mean age = 46.08, mean education = 14.17, 63.7% Female, 88.2% White). Effect sizes and t-tests were calculated using the PAI validity, clinical, interpersonal, and treatment consideration scales as well as clinical subscales. Results: The results replicated earlier findings on the PAI in Long COVID by demonstrating that both Long COVID and PCS groups had the highest mean elevations on SOM and DEP scales but no statistically significant between group differences in mean scale elevations. Results support similarities in psychological functioning between Long COVID and PCS patients emphasizing the importance of evaluating psychological functioning in neuropsychological evaluations for these populations. Further, results suggest that psychological treatment strategies for PCS patients may be helpful for Long COVID patients, but more research is needed.

Cognition and psychological well-being in adults with post COVID-19 condition and analyses of symptom sequelae

OBJECTIVE

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic moves into its fourth year, gaining a better clinical understanding of individuals with post COVID-19 condition is paramount. The current study examined the neurocognitive and psychological status of adults with post COVID-19 condition, as well as explored the impact of high psychological burden on objective neurocognitive functioning and the relationship between subjective cognitive concerns and objective neurocognitive findings.

METHOD

Valid neuropsychological assessments were completed with 51 symptomatic adults who were 297.55 days, on average, following a confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Participants completed brief self-report depression, anxiety, and PTSD questionnaires, a questionnaire with subjective ratings of cognitive abilities, and standardized neurocognitive tests that examined performance validity, attention, processing speed, verbal learning and memory, naming, visual construction, and executive functioning.

RESULTS

The participants were mostly Caucasian (80.39%), middle-aged (average 47.37 years), women (82.35%), who were never hospitalized (86.27%). Despite all individuals reporting cognitive problems in daily life, mean performances on objective testing did not reveal any neurocognitive deficits (at or below the 8th percentile) at a group level. Approximately half (49.02%) of the participants reported co-occurring mental health symptoms that were considered clinically elevated based on questionnaire results. High psychological symptom burden was associated with greater subjective cognitive difficulties but did not result in neurocognitive dysfunction on objective testing.

CONCLUSIONS

This study contributes to the literature regarding post COVID-19 condition in adults including the relationship between the cognitive and psychological symptoms. Results are summarized in key clinical learning points.

Neuropsychological Function in Traumatic Brain Injury and the Influence of Chronic Pain

Cognitive dysfunction, pain, and psychological morbidity all present unique challenges to those living with traumatic brain injury (TBI). In this study we examined (a) the impact of pain across domains of attention, memory, and executive function, and (b) the relationships between pain and depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in persons with chronic TBI. Our sample included 86 participants with a TBI and chronic pain (n = 26), patients with TBI and no chronic pain (n = 23), and a pain-free control group without TBI (n = 37). Participants visited the laboratory and completed a comprehensive battery of neuropsychological tests as part of a structured interview. Multivariate analysis of covariance using education as a covariate, failed to detect a significant group difference for neuropsychological composite scores of attention, memory, and executive function (p = .165). A follow-up analysis using multiple one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted for individual measures of executive function. Post-hoc testing indicated that those in both TBI groups preformed significantly worse on measures of semantic fluency when compared to controls (p < 0.001, ηρ2 = .16). Additionally, multiple ANOVAs indicated that those with TBI and pain scored significantly worse across all psychological assessments (p < .001). We also found significant associations between measures of pain and most psychological symptoms. A follow-up stepwise linear regression among those in the TBI pain group indicated that post concussive complaints, pain severity, and neuropathic pain symptoms differentially contributed to symptoms of depression, anxiety, and PTSD. These findings suggest deficits in verbal fluency among those living with chronic TBI, with results also reinforcing the multidimensional nature of pain and its psychological significance in this population.

Effectiveness of a guideline implementation tool for supporting management of mental health complications after mild traumatic brain injury in primary care: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Mental health problems frequently interfere with recovery from mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) but are under-recognised and undertreated. Consistent implementation of clinical practice guidelines for proactive detection and treatment of mental health complications after mTBI will require evidence-based knowledge translation strategies. This study aims to determine if a guideline implementation tool can reduce the risk of mental health complications following mTBI. If effective, our guideline implementation tool could be readily scaled up and/or adapted to other healthcare settings.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a triple-blind cluster randomised trial to evaluate a clinical practice guideline implementation tool designed to support proactive management of mental health complications after mTBI in primary care. We will recruit 535 adults (aged 18-69 years) with mTBI from six emergency departments and two urgent care centres in the Greater Vancouver Area, Canada. Upon enrolment at 2 weeks post-injury, they will complete mental health symptom screening tools and designate a general practitioner (GP) or primary care clinic where they plan to seek follow-up care. Primary care clinics will be randomised into one of two arms. In the guideline implementation tool arm, GPs will receive actionable mental health screening test results tailored to their patient and their patients will receive written education about mental health problems after mTBI and treatment options. In the usual care control arm, GPs and their patients will receive generic information about mTBI. Patient participants will complete outcome measures remotely at 2, 12 and 26 weeks post-injury. The primary outcome is rate of new or worsened mood, anxiety or trauma-related disorder on the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview at 26 weeks.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Study procedures were approved by the University of British Columbia's research ethics board (H20-00562). The primary report for the trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. Our knowledge user team members (patients, GPs, policymakers) will co-create a plan for public dissemination.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04704037).