Nonstandardized Assessment Approaches for Individuals with Traumatic Brain Injuries

Carl Coelho; Mark Ylvisaker; Lyn S. Turkstra

doi:10.1055/s-2005-922102

Seminars in Speech and Language, Table of Contents

Semin Speech Lang 2005; 26(4): 223-241
DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-922102

Nonstandardized Assessment Approaches for Individuals with Traumatic Brain Injuries

Carl Coelho¹ , Mark Ylvisaker² , Lyn S. Turkstra³

¹Communication Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut
²College of St. Rose, Albany, New York
³Department of Communicative Disorders, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Nonstandardized assessment procedures serve a variety of purposes, including determining competencies in domains for which there are no standardized tests, describing performance in the context of real-world settings and activities, and exploring the effects of systematic changes in communication and cognitive demands and partner supports. This article reviews evidence on the use of nonstandardized procedures for the assessment of individuals with traumatic brain injury and offers recommendations for the use of the procedures that are supported by the available evidence.

KEYWORDS

Traumatic brain injury - assessment - nonstandardized - functional - cognition - communication - discourse - social cognition - pragmatics

Full Text

References

REFERENCES

1 Turkstra L, Coelho C, Ylvisaker M. The use of standardized tests for individuals with cognitive-communication disorders. Semin Speech Lang. 2005; 26 215-222
2 Lidz C S. Dynamic Assessment: An Interactional Approach to Evaluating Learning Potential. New York; Guilford Press 1987
3 Kaplan E. A process approach to neuropsychological assessment. In: Boll T, Bryant BK Clinical Neuropsychology and Brain Function: Research, Measurement, and Practice. Washington, DC; American Psychological Association 1988: 125-167
4 World Health Organization .International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Report. Geneva, Switzerland; World Health Organization 2001
5 Goodglass H, Kaplan E, Barresi B. Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination. 3rd ed. San Antonio, TX; Psychological Corporation 2000
6 Brown M, Gordon W A. Quality of life as a construct in health and disability research. Mt Sinai J Med. 1999; 66 160-169
7 Burgess P W, Alderman N, Evans J, Emslie H, Wilson B A. The ecological validity of tests of executive function. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 1998; 4 547-558
8 Norris G, Tate R L. The Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome (BADS): concurrent and construct validity. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2000; 10 33-45
9 Rath J F, Simon D, Langenbahn D M, Sherr R L, Diller L. Measurement of problem-solving deficits in adults with acquired brain damage. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2000; 15 724-733
10 Wilson B A. Goal planning rather than neuropsychological tests should be used to structure and evaluate cognitive rehabilitation. Brain Impairment. 2003; 4 25-30
11 Anderson S W, Damasio H, Tranel D, Damasio A R. Long-term sequelae of prefrontal cortex damage acquired in early childhood. Dev Neuropsychol. 2000; 18 281-296
12 Ewing-Cobbs L, Fletcher J M, Levin H S, Iovino I, Miner M E. Academic achievement and academic placement following traumatic brain injury in children and adolescents: a two-year longitudinal study. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1998; 20 769-781
13 Perrott S B, Taylor H G, Montes J L. Neuropsychological sequelae, familial stress, and environmental adaptation following pediatric head injury. Dev Neuropsychol. 1991; 7 69-86
14 Anderson P J, Anderson V A, Northam E A, Taylor H G. Standardization of the Contingency Naming Test (CNT) for school-aged children: a measure of reactive flexibility. Clin Neuropsychol Assess. 2000; 1 247-273
15 LeBlanc J E, Hayden M E, Paulman R G. A comparison of neuropsychological and situational assessment for predicting employability after closed head injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2000; 15 1022-1040
16 Starch S, Falltrick E. The importance of a home evaluation for brain injured clients: a team approach. J Cog Rehabil. 1990; 3 28-32
17 Chaytor N J, Schmitter-Edgecombe M. The ecological validity of neuropsychological tests: a review of the literature on everyday cognitive skills. Neuropsychol Rev. 2003; 13 181-197
18 Coelho C A, Liles B Z, Duffy R J. The use of discourse analyses for the evaluation of higher level traumatically brain-injured adults. Brain Inj. 1991; 5 381-392
19 Biddle K R, McCabe A, Bliss L S. Narrative skills following traumatic brain injury in children and adults. J Commun Disord. 1996; 29 447-469
20 Body R, Perkins M R. Validation of linguistic analyses in narrative discourse after traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 2004; 18 707-724
21 Brookshire B L, Chapman S B, Song J, Levin H S. Cognitive and linguistic correlates of children's discourse after closed head injury: a three-year follow-up. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2000; 6 741-751
22 Chapman S B, Culhane K A, Levin H S et al.. Narrative discourse after closed head injury in children and adolescents. Brain Lang. 1992; 43 42-65
23 Coelho C A. Story narratives of adults with closed head injury and non-brain injured adults: influence of socioeconomic status, elicitation task, and executive functioning. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2002; 45 1232-1248
24 Coelho C, Liles B, Duffy R. Discourse analyses with closed head injured adults: evidence for differing patterns of deficits. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1991; 72 465-468
25 Davis G A, Coelho C A. Referential cohesion and logical coherence of narration after closed head injury. Brain Lang. 2004; 89 508-523
26 Galski T, Tompkins C, Johnston M V. Competence in discourse as a measure of social integration and quality of life in persons with traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 1998; 12 769-782
27 Glosser G, Deser T. Patterns of discourse production among neurological patients with fluent language disorders. Brain Lang. 1990; 40 67-88
28 Hartley L L, Jensen P J. Narrative and procedural discourse after closed head injury. Brain Inj. 1991; 5 267-285
29 Liles B Z, Coelho C A, Duffy R J, Zalagens M R. Effects of elicitation procedures on the narratives of normal and closed head-injured adults. J Speech Hear Disord. 1989; 54 356-366
30 Stout C E, Yorkston K M, Pimentel J I. Discourse production following mild, moderate, and severe traumatic brain injury: a comparison of two tasks. J Med Speech-Lang Pathol. 2000; 8 15-25
31 Van Leer E, Turkstra L. The effect of elicitation task on discourse coherence and cohesion in adolescents with brain injury. J Commun Disord. 1999; 32 327-349
32 Mentis M, Prutting C A. Cohesion in the discourse of normal and head-injured adults. J Speech Hear Res. 1987; 30 88-98
33 Snow P, Douglas J, Ponsford J. Procedural discourse following traumatic brain injury. Aphasiology. 1997; 11 947-967
34 Turkstra L S, McDonald S, Kaufmann P M. Assessment of pragmatic communication skills in adolescents after traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 1996; 10 329-345
35 Ehrlich J S. Selective characteristics of narrative discourse in head-injured and normal adults. J Commun Disord. 1988; 21 1-9
36 Tucker F M, Hanlon R E. Effects of mild traumatic brain injury on narrative discourse production. Brain Inj. 1998; 12 783-792
37 McDonald S. Pragmatic language skills after closed head injury: ability to meet the informational needs of the listener. Brain Lang. 1993; 44 28-46
38 Coelho C A, Youse K M, Le K N. Conversational discourse in closed-head-injured and non-brain-injured adults. Aphasiology. 2002; 16 659-672
39 Mentis M, Prutting C A. Analysis of topic as illustrated in a head-injured and a normal adult. J Speech Hear Res. 1991; 34 583-595
40 Coelho C A, Youse K M, Le K N, Feinn R. Narrative and conversational discourse of adults with closed head injuries and non-brain-injured adults: a discriminant analysis. Aphasiology. 2003; 17 499-510
41 Damico J. Clinical discourse analysis: a functional language assessment technique. In: Simon CS Communication Skills and Classroom Success: Assessment of Language-Learning Disabled Students. San Diego, CA; College-Hill 1985: 125-150
42 Prince S, Haynes W O, Haak N J. Occurrence of contingent queries and discourse errors in referential communication and conversational tasks: a study of college students with closed head injury. J Med Speech-Lang Pathol. 2002; 10 19-39
43 Snow P, Douglas J, Ponsford J. Conversational discourse abilities following severe traumatic brain injury: a follow-up study. Brain Inj. 1998; 12 911-935
44 Prutting C, Kirschner D. A clinical appraisal of the pragmatic aspects of language. J Speech Hear Disord. 1987; 52 105-119
45 Ehrlich J, Barry P. Rating communication behaviors in the head-injured adult. Brain Inj. 1989; 3 193-198
46 Milton S B, Prutting C A. Appraisal of Communication Competence in Head Injured Adults. Minneapolis, MN; BRK Publishers 1987
47 Bond F, Godfrey H PD. Conversation with traumatically brain-injured individuals: a controlled study of behavioural changes and their impact. Brain Inj. 1997; 11 319-329
48 Coelho C A, Liles B Z, Duffy R J. Analysis of conversational discourse in head injured adults. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 1991; 6 92-99
49 Wozniak R J, Coelho C A, Duffy R J, Liles B Z. Intonation unit analysis of conversational discourse in closed head injury. Brain Inj. 1999; 13 191-203
50 Penn C, Cleary J. Compensatory strategies in the language of closed head injured patients. Brain Inj. 1988; 2 3-17
51 Jordan F, Ward K, Cremona-Meteyard S. Word-finding in the conversational discourse of children with closed head injury. Aphasiology. 1997; 11 877-888
52 Campbell T F, Dollaghan C A. Expressive language recovery in severely brain-injured children and adolescents. J Speech Hear Disord. 1990; 55 567-581
53 Gerber S, Gurland G. Interactive analysis of pragmatic-linguistic abilities in acquired aphasia. Presented at: the annual convention of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association November 1990 Seattle, WA;
54 Halper A S, Cherney L R, Burns M S, Mogil S I. Clinical Management of Right Hemisphere Dysfunction. 2nd ed. Gaithersburg, MD; Aspen 1996
55 Roth F P, Spekman N J. Assessing the pragmatic abilities of children: Part 2. Guidelines, considerations, and specific evaluation procedures. J Speech Hear Disord. 1984; 49 12-17
56 Roth F P, Spekman N J. Assessing the pragmatic abilities of children: Part 1. Organizational framework and assessment parameters. J Speech Hear Disord. 1984; 49 2-11
57 Togher L, Hand L, Code C. Measuring service encounters in the traumatic brain injury population. Aphasiology. 1997; 11 491-505
58 Togher L, Hand L, Code C. Exchanges of information in the talk of people with traumatic brain injury. In: McDonald S, Togher L, Code C Communication Skills following Traumatic Brain Injury. Hove, UK; Psychology Press 1999: 113-145
59 Togher L, Hands L, Code C. Analysing discourse in the traumatic brain injury population: telephone interactions with different communication partners. Brain Inj. 1997; 11 169-189
60 Baron-Cohen S, Jolliffe T. Another advanced test of theory of mind: evidence from very high functioning adults with autism or Asperger syndrome. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1997; 38 813-822
61 Happe F. An advanced test of theory of mind: understanding of story characters' thoughts and feelings by able autistic, mentally handicapped, and normal children and adults. J Autism Dev Disord. 1994; 24 129-154
62 Baron-Cohen S, O'Riordan M, Stone V, Jones R, Plaisted K. Recognition of faux pas by normally developing children and children with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. J Autism Dev Disord. 1999; 29 407-418
63 Turkstra L S, McDonald S, DePompei R. Social information processing in adolescents: data from normally developing adolescents and preliminary data from their peers with traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2001; 16 469-483
64 Flanagan S, McDonald S, Rollins J. The Awareness of Social Inference Test (TASIT). Sydney, Australia; University of New South Wales 1998
65 Cuerva A G, Sabe L, Kuzis G, Tiberti C, Dorrego F, Starkstein S E. Theory of mind and pragmatic abilities in dementia. Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol. 2001; 14 153-158
66 Gregory C, Lough S, Stone V et al.. Theory of mind in patients with frontal variant frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease: theoretical and practical implications. Brain. 2002; 125 752-764
67 Happe F, Brownell H, Winner E. Acquired ‘theory of mind’ impairments following stroke. Cognition. 1999; 70 211-240
68 Rowe A D, Bullock P R, Pokley C E, Morris R G. ‘Theory of mind’ impairments and their relationship to executive functioning following frontal lobe excisions. Brain. 2001; 124 600-616
69 Ylvisaker M, Feeney T J. Collaborative Brain Injury Intervention: Positive Everyday Routines. San Diego, CA; Singular Publishing Group 1998
70 Ylvisaker M, Gioia G. Cognitive assessment. In: Ylvisaker M Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation. 2nd ed. Boston, MA; Butterworth-Heinemann 1998: 159-179
71 Vygotsky L S. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA; Harvard University Press 1978
72 Feuerstein R. The Dynamic Assessment of Retarded Performers: The Learning Potential Assessment Device, Theory, Instruments, and Techniques. Baltimore, MD; University Park Press 1979
73 Swanson H L, Lassier C M. A selective synthesis of the experimental literature on dynamic assessment. Rev Educ Res. 2001; 71 321-363
74 Alberto P, Troutman A. Applied Behavior Analysis for Teachers. 6th ed. Columbus, OH; Merrill Prentice Hall 2003
75 Hersen M, Bellack A S. Behavioral Assessment: A Practical Handbook. 2d ed. Elmsford, NY; Pergamon Press 1976
76 Ylvisaker M, Szekeres S F, Feeney T. Cognitive rehabilitation: executive functions. In: Ylvisaker M Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation: Children and Adolescents. Revised ed. Boston; Butterworth-Heinemann 1998: 221-269
77 Hartley L L. Cognitive-Communicative Abilities following Brain Injury: A Functional Approach. San Diego, CA; Singular Publishing 1995
78 Damico J S, Simmons-Mackie N N. Communicative profiling system for aphasia. Biennial International Conference of the British Aphasiology Society September 11-13, 2001 University of Exeter, Exeter, England;
79 Ylvisaker M, Sellars C, Edelman L. Rehabilitation after traumatic brain injury in preschoolers. In: Ylvisaker M Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation: Children and Adolescents. Revised ed. Boston; Butterworth-Heinemann 1998: 303-329
80 Fivush R. The social construction of personal narratives. Merrill Palmer Q. 1991; 37 59-81
81 Fivush R, Reese E. The social construction of autobiographical memory. In: Conway MA, Rubin DC, Spinnler H, Wagenaar WA Theoretical Perspectives on Autobiographical Memory. The Hague, The Netherlands; Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992: 115-132
82 Haden C A, Haine R A, Fivush R. Developing narrative structure in parent-child reminiscing across the preschool years. Dev Psychol. 1997; 33 295-307
83 Hudson J A. The emergence of autobiographical memory in mother-child conversations. In: Fivush R, Hudson JA Knowing and Remembering in Young Children. New York; Cambridge University Press 1990: 166-196
84 McCabe A, Peterson C. Getting the story: a longitudinal study of parental styles in eliciting narratives and developing narrative skills. In: McCabe A, Peterson C New Directions in Developing Narrative Structure. Hillsdale, NJ; Erlbaum 1991: 217-253
85 Reese E, Haden C A, Fivush R. Mother-child conversations about the past: relationships of style and memory over time. Cog Dev. 1993; 8 403-430
86 Landry S H, Miller-Loncar C L, Smith K E, Swank P R. The role of early parenting in children's development of executive processes. Dev Neuropsychol. 2002; 21 15-41
87 Landry S H, Smith K E, Swank P R. The importance of parenting during early childhood for school-age development. Dev Neuropsychol. 2003; 24 559-591
88 Blosser J, Neidecker E. School Programs in Speech-Language: Organization and Management. 4th ed. Boston, MA; Allyn & Bacon 2001
89 Blosser J L, DePompei R. Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury: Proactive Intervention. Clifton Park, NY; Thompson Learning 2003
90 Halliday M AK. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. London; Edward Arnold 1994
91 Halliday M AK. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London; Edward Arnold 1985

Carl CoelhoPh.D.

Communication Sciences, University of Connecticut, Unit 1085, Storrs, CT 06269-1085

Email: coelho@uconn.edu