Faculty Bibliography

There is a subset of patients with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) that report persistent symptoms that impair their functioning and quality of life. Being able to predict which patients will experience prolonged symptom recovery would help clinicians target resources for clinical follow-up to those most in need and would facilitate research to develop precision medicine treatments for mTBI. The purpose of this study was to investigate the predictors of symptom recovery in a prospective sample of emergency department trauma patients with either mTBI or non-mTBI injuries. Subjects were examined at several time points from within 72 hours to 45 days post-injury. We quantified and compared the value of a variety of demographic, injury, and clinical assessment (symptom, neurocognitive) variables for predicting self-reported symptom duration in both mTBI (n = 89) and trauma control (n = 73) patients. Several injury-related and neuropsychological variables assessed acutely (< 72 hours) post-injury predicted symptom duration, particularly loss of consciousness (mTBI group), acute somatic symptom burden (both groups), and acute reaction time (both groups), with reasonably good model fit when including all of these variables (AUC = .76). Incorporating self-reported litigation involvement modestly increased prediction further (AUC = .80). The results highlight the multifactorial nature of mTBI recovery, and injury recovery more generally, and the need to incorporate a variety of variables to achieve adequate prediction. Further research to improve this model and validate it in new and more diverse trauma samples will be useful to build a neurobiopsychosocial model of recovery that informs treatment development.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the electroencephalographic (EEG) Brain Function Index (BFI) for characterizing sports-related concussive injury and recovery. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred fifty-four (354) male contact sport high school and college athletes were prospectively recruited from multiple locations over 6 academic years of play (244 control baseline athletes and 110 athletes with a concussion). METHODS: Using 5 to 10 minutes of eyes closed resting EEG collected from frontal and frontotemporal regions, a BFI was computed for all subjects and sessions. Group comparisons were performed to test for the significance of the difference in the BFI score between the controls at baseline and athletes with a concussion at several time points. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in BFI between athletes with a concussion at baseline (ie, prior to injury) and controls at baseline (P = .4634). Athletes with a concussion, tested within 72 hours of injury, exhibited significant differences in BFI compared with controls (P = .0036). The significant differences in BFI were no longer observed at 45 days following injury (P = .19). CONCLUSION: Controls and athletes with a concussion exhibited equivalent BFI scores at preseason baseline. The concussive injury (measured within 72 hours) significantly affected brain function reflected in the BFI in the athletes with a concussion. The BFI of the athletes with a concussion returned to levels seen in controls by day 45, suggesting recovery. The BFI may provide an important objective marker of concussive injury and recovery.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated professional practice and common test use among clinical neuropsychologists engaging in forensic assessment. METHOD: Doctorate-level psychologists active in the practice of neuropsychology and on the INS and NAN membership listings (n = 502) were surveyed about their demographics, professional practice, and common test use. Participants who reported engaging in forensic practice (n = 255) were further surveyed about their forensic practice. RESULTS: Forensic participants were more likely to be male and Caucasian, and reported higher ages, more years of professional experience, and a higher prevalence of board certification. While characteristics of their professional and forensic practice varied, forensic participants reported spending most of their professional time conducting neuropsychological assessments with adult clients in a private or group practice setting, focusing on civil referrals and civil legal questions involving older adult issues, developmental issues, head injury, and psychiatric issues. Common test use across neuropsychological assessment domains is presented for board-certified forensic participants (n = 77). An examination of these results reveals that the current pattern of test use is similar to the results of a more general survey of neuropsychological test use. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide insight into the practice of forensic neuropsychological assessment, and further establish the admissibility of neuropsychological evidence in the United States legal system. Results will be useful for clinical neuropsychologists, field leaders, and legal professionals hoping to gain insight into the role of clinical neuropsychology in civil and criminal legal decision-making.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177177.].