Latent Neuropsychological Profiles to Discriminate Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Active-Duty Service Members

Neuropsychological Profiles of Deployment-Related Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A LIMBIC-CENC Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a concern for US service members and veterans (SMV), leading to heterogeneous psychological and cognitive outcomes. We sought to identify neuropsychological profiles of mild TBI (mTBI) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among the largest SMV sample to date.

METHODS

We analyzed cross-sectional baseline data from SMV with prior combat deployments enrolled in the ongoing Long-term Impact of Military-relevant Brain Injury Consortium-Chronic Effects of Neurotrauma Consortium prospective longitudinal study. Latent profile analysis identified symptom profiles using 35 indicators, including physical symptoms, depression, quality of life, sleep quality, postconcussive symptoms, and cognitive performance. It is important to note that the profiles were determined independently of mTBI and probable PTSD status. After profile identification, we examined associations between demographic variables, mTBI characteristics, and PTSD symptoms with symptom profile membership.

RESULTS

The analytic sample included 1,659 SMV (mean age 41.1 ± 10.0 years; 87% male); among them 29% (n = 480) had a history of non-deployment-related mTBI only, 14% (n = 239) had deployment-related mTBI only, 36% (n = 602) had both non-deployment and deployment-related mTBI, and 30% (n = 497) met criteria for probable PTSD. A 6-profile model had the best fit, with separation on all indicators (p < 0.001). The model revealed distinct neuropsychological profiles, representing a combination of 3 self-reported functioning patterns: high (HS), moderate (MS), and low (LS), and 2 cognitive performance patterns: high (HC) and low (LC). The profiles were (1) HS/HC: n=301, 18.1%; (2) HS/LC: n=294, 17.7%; (3) MS/HC: n=359, 21.6%; (4) MS/LC: n=316, 19.0%; (5) LS/HC: n=228, 13.7%; and (6) LS/LC: n=161, 9.7%. SMV with deployment-related mTBI tended to be grouped into lower functioning profiles and were more likely to meet criteria for probable PTSD. Conversely, SMV with no mTBI exposure or non-deployment-related mTBI were clustered in higher functioning profiles and had a lower likelihood of meeting criteria for probable PTSD.

DISCUSSION

Findings suggest varied symptom and functional profiles in SMV, influenced by injury context and probable PTSD comorbidity. Despite diagnostic challenges, comprehensive assessment of functioning and cognition can detect subtle differences related to mTBI and PTSD, revealing distinct neuropsychological profiles. Prioritizing early treatment based on these profiles may improve prognostication and support efficient recovery.

Intimate Partner Violence-Related Brain Injury: Unmasking and Addressing the Gaps

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a significant, global public health concern. Women, individuals with historically underrepresented identities, and disabilities are at high risk for IPV and tend to experience severe injuries. There has been growing concern about the risk of exposure to IPV-related head trauma, resulting in IPV-related brain injury (IPV-BI), and its health consequences. Past work suggests that a significant proportion of women exposed to IPV experience IPV-BI, likely representing a distinct phenotype compared with BI of other etiologies. An IPV-BI often co-occurs with psychological trauma and mental health complaints, leading to unique issues related to identifying, prognosticating, and managing IPV-BI outcomes. The goal of this review is to identify important gaps in research and clinical practice in IPV-BI and suggest potential solutions to address them. We summarize IPV research in five key priority areas: (1) unique considerations for IPV-BI study design; (2) understanding non-fatal strangulation as a form of BI; (3) identifying objective biomarkers of IPV-BI; (4) consideration of the chronicity, cumulative and late effects of IPV-BI; and (5) BI as a risk factor for IPV engagement. Our review concludes with a call to action to help investigators develop ecologically valid research studies addressing the identified clinical-research knowledge gaps and strategies to improve care in individuals exposed to IPV-BI. By reducing the current gaps and answering these calls to action, we will approach IPV-BI in a trauma-informed manner, ultimately improving outcomes and quality of life for those impacted by IPV-BI.

Discriminating Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Using Latent Neuroimaging and Neuropsychological Profiles in Active-Duty Military Service Members

OBJECTIVE

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) commonly occur among military Service Members and Veterans and have heterogenous, but also overlapping symptom presentations, which often complicate the diagnoses of underlying impairments and development of effective treatment plans. Thus, we sought to examine whether the combination of whole brain gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM) structural measures with neuropsychological performance can aid in the classification of military personnel with mTBI and PTSD.

METHODS

Active-Duty US Service Members ( n = 156; 87.8% male) with a history of mTBI, PTSD, combined mTBI+PTSD, or orthopedic injury completed a neuropsychological battery and T1- and diffusion-weighted structural neuroimaging. Cortical, subcortical, ventricular, and WM volumes and whole brain fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), radial diffusivity (RD), and axial diffusivity (AD) were calculated. Latent profile analyses were performed to determine how the GM and WM indicators, together with neuropsychological indicators, classified individuals.

RESULTS

For both GM and WM, respectively, a 4-profile model was the best fit. The GM model identified greater ventricular volumes in Service Members with cognitive symptoms, including those with a diagnosis of mTBI, either alone or with PTSD. The WM model identified reduced FA and elevated RD in those with psychological symptoms, including those with PTSD or mTBI and comorbid PTSD. However, contrary to expectation, a global neural signature unique to those with comorbid mTBI and PTSD was not identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings demonstrate that neuropsychological performance alone is more robust in differentiating Active-Duty Service Members with mTBI and PTSD, whereas global neuroimaging measures do not reliably differentiate between these groups.