Performance Validity and Outcome of Cognitive Behavior Therapy in Patients with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Litigation, Performance Validity Testing, and Treatment Outcomes in Adults With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether involvement in litigation and performance validity test (PVT) failure predict adherence to treatment and treatment outcomes in adults with persistent symptoms after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI).

SETTING

Outpatient concussion clinics in British Columbia, Canada. Participants were assessed at intake (average 12.9 weeks postinjury) and again following 3 to 4 months of rehabilitation.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults who met the World Health Organization Neurotrauma Task Force definition of mTBI. Litigation status was known for 69 participants ( n = 21 reported litigation), and 62 participants completed a PVT ( n = 13 failed the Test of Memory Malingering) at clinic intake.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of a clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT03972579).

MAIN MEASURES

Outcomes included number of completed sessions, homework adherence, symptoms (Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire), disability ratings (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0), and patient-rated global impression of change.

RESULTS

We did not observe substantial differences in session and homework adherence associated with litigation or PVT failure. Disability and postconcussion symptoms generally improved with treatment. Involvement in litigation was associated with a smaller improvement in outcomes, particularly disability ( B = 2.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.25-4.89], P = .03) and patient-reported global impression of change (odds ratio [OR] = 4.19, 95% CI [1.40-12.57], P = .01). PVT failure was not associated with considerable differences in treatment outcomes. However, participants who failed the PVT had a higher rate of missing outcomes (31% vs 8%) and perceived somewhat less global improvement (OR = 3.47, 95% CI [0.86-14.04]; P = .08).

CONCLUSION

Adults with mTBI who are in litigation or who failed PVTs tend to adhere to and improve following treatment. However, involvement in litigation may be associated with attenuated improvements, and pretreatment PVT failure may predict lower engagement in the treatment process.

Performance Validity Test Failure in the Clinical Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prevalence Rates

Performance validity tests (PVTs) are used to measure the validity of the obtained neuropsychological test data. However, when an individual fails a PVT, the likelihood that failure truly reflects invalid performance (i.e., the positive predictive value) depends on the base rate in the context in which the assessment takes place. Therefore, accurate base rate information is needed to guide interpretation of PVT performance. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the base rate of PVT failure in the clinical population (PROSPERO number: CRD42020164128). PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and PsychINFO were searched to identify articles published up to November 5, 2021. Main eligibility criteria were a clinical evaluation context and utilization of stand-alone and well-validated PVTs. Of the 457 articles scrutinized for eligibility, 47 were selected for systematic review and meta-analyses. Pooled base rate of PVT failure for all included studies was 16%, 95% CI [14, 19]. High heterogeneity existed among these studies (Cochran's Q = 697.97, p < .001; I2 = 91%; τ2 = 0.08). Subgroup analysis indicated that pooled PVT failure rates varied across clinical context, presence of external incentives, clinical diagnosis, and utilized PVT. Our findings can be used for calculating clinically applied statistics (i.e., positive and negative predictive values, and likelihood ratios) to increase the diagnostic accuracy of performance validity determination in clinical evaluation. Future research is necessary with more detailed recruitment procedures and sample descriptions to further improve the accuracy of the base rate of PVT failure in clinical practice.

Case study of invalid to valid shift in cognitive performance following successful treatment of psychogenic nonepileptic seizure events

Patients with psychogenic nonepileptic seizure (PNES) who fail performance validity testing (PVT) may appear to produce non-valid cognitive profiles. Consequently, they may not get referred to treatment and events persist, with worsening disability and high resource utilization. As a result, we report pre- and post-treatment neuropsychological evaluation findings in a 59-year-old woman with a confirmed diagnosis of PNES established using video-EEG monitoring. At pre-treatment baseline neuropsychological evaluation, PNES events occurred weekly to daily. Performance was impaired across PVTs and across multiple cognitive domains. After behavioral intervention specific to PNES, these events substantially reduced in frequency to rare stress-induced flares. Post-treatment neuropsychological evaluation revealed marked improvement of most cognitive and behavioral scores from baseline, and valid PVT scores. We review predisposing, precipitating, and perpetuating factors for PNES and cognitive impairment in this case and discuss the patient's outcome from treatment. Effectively managing PNES events and dissociative tendencies while reducing unnecessary pharmacological interventions appears to have allowed this patient to function closer to her optimal state. This case illustrates the complexity of Functional Neurologic Disorder (FND) clinical presentation and challenges the assumption that suboptimal neuropsychological performance predicts poor treatment engagement and outcome. We showcase the reversibility of PNES and cognitive manifestations of FND using targeted psychotherapeutic interventions, which resulted in reduced disability and associated healthcare costs, as well as re-engagement in life.

Cry for help as a root cause of poor symptom validity: A critical note

When patients fail symptom validity tests (SVTs) and/or performance validity tests (PVTs), their self-reported symptoms and test profiles are unreliable and cannot be taken for granted. There are many well-established causes of poor symptom validity and malingering is only of them. Some authors have proposed that a cry for help may underlie poor symptom validity. In this commentary, we argue that cry for help is a (1) metaphorical concept that is (2) difficult to operationalize and, at present, (3) impossible to falsify. We conclude that clinicians or forensic experts should not invoke cry for help as an explanation for poor symptom validity. To encourage conceptual clarity, we propose a tentative framework for explaining poor symptom validity.

Symptom and Performance Validity Assessment in European Countries: an Update

In 2013, a special issue of the Spanish journal Clínica y Salud published a review on symptom and performance validity assessment in European countries (Merten et al. in Clínica y Salud, 24(3), 129–138, 2013). At that time, developments were judged to be in their infancy in many countries, with major publication activities stemming from only four countries: Spain, The Netherlands, Great Britain, and Germany. As an introduction to a special issue of Psychological Injury and Law, this is an updated report of developments during the last 10 years. In that period of time, research activities have reached a level where it is difficult to follow all developments; some validity measures were newly developed, others were adapted for European languages, and validity assessment has found a much stronger place in real-world evaluation contexts. Next to an update from the four nations mentioned above, reports are now given from Austria, Italy, and Switzerland, too.