Optimizing measurement for neurobehavioural rehabilitation services: A multisite comparison study and response to UKROC

Cognitive communication disorders after brain injury: A systematic COSMIN review of measurement instruments

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of consensus on standardized measurement instruments (MIs) for the assessment of cognitive communication disorders in individuals with acquired brain injury (ABI).

OBJECTIVES

To identify and describe the currently available MIs for the assessment of cognitive communication disorders in individuals with ABI and to evaluate the psychometric properties of MIs.

METHODS

A search was conducted in 6 databases on March 12, 2024 using a validated methodological search filter. We included studies that evaluated psychometric properties of MIs used to assess cognitive communication disorders in individuals with ABI. We applied the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) to evaluate the psychometric properties of the MIs.

RESULTS

We included 48 records reporting on 44 MIs. Of all MIs, the La Trobe Communication Questionnaire (LCQ) and the St Andrew's-Swansea Neurobehavioural Outcome Scale (SASNOS) were studied most extensively. No MIs had undergone exhaustive methodological evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the COSMIN, only 1 of 44 MIs can be recommended as its results can be trusted. Most MIs have the potential to be recommended but require further research to assess their psychometric quality. The development of new tools is not necessary but further methodological studies should be conducted on promising tools. This review may help clinicians and researchers to select an MI for the assessment of cognitive communication disorders and may facilitate diagnosis and research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO database (registration number: CRD42020196861). No funding.

The Measure of an Outcome: Comparing Norming and Stacking to Benchmark the Effectiveness of Brain Injury Rehabilitation Services

Practitioners have a clinical, ethical, academic, and economic responsibility to dispassionately consider how effective their services are. Approaches to measure how "good" or "bad" healthcare is include clinical audit, satisfaction surveys, and routine outcome measurement. However, the process of comparing the clinical outcomes of a specific service against the 'best' services in the same specialism, also known as benchmarking, remains challenging, and it is unclear how it affects quality improvement. This paper piloted and compared two different approaches to benchmarking to assess clinical outcomes in neurorehabilitation. Norming involved comparing routine measures of clinical outcome with external validators. Stacking involved pooling and comparing internal data across several years. The analyses of routine clinical outcome data from 167 patients revealed significant differences in the patient characteristics of those admitted to the same service provider over time, but no differences in outcomes achieved when comparing with historical data or with external reference data. These findings illustrate the potential advantages and limitations of using stacking and norming to benchmark clinical outcomes, and how the results from each approach might be used to evaluate service effectiveness and inform quality improvement within the field of brain injury rehabilitation.

Using the St Andrew's - Swansea Neurobehavioural Outcome Scale (SASNOS) to determine prevalence and predictors of neurobehavioural disability amongst survivors with traumatic brain injury in the community

Studies using the St Andrew's - Swansea Neurobehavioural Outcome Scale (SASNOS) confirm neurobehavioural disability (NBD) is highly prevalent in inpatient Neurobehavioural Rehabilitation and Stroke samples. However, a recent study amongst a Danish community sample of acquired brain injury survivors found a relative paucity of NBD symptoms; and when symptoms were present, they tended to be of mild severity. The current observational study employed the SASNOS to explore prevalence of NBD in survivors with traumatic brain injury (TBI) living in the community, the extent of survivors' self-awareness of NBD symptoms, and constructed prediction models of NBD. A de-identified data set was compiled, comprising data for 97 TBI survivors (74.2% men, mean time since injury 2.8 years). In addition to SASNOS self- and proxy-ratings, various demographic, clinical and injury-related characteristics were captured. NBD was found to be highly characteristic, although severity varied depending on subtype. Statistical comparison of self- and proxy-ratings did not support reduced self awareness regarding NBD, whereas treating the problem as one of inter-rater reliability suggested this was an issue. Executive impairment, depressed mood and sex were especially prognostic of NBD. Reasons accounting for differences in NBD between the community samples are discussed and recommendations for future research made.