Search

Background: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures produce scores that do not always have obvious clinical meaning. The PRO-bookmarking procedure is a new and promising way to make PRO measures more meaningful and interpretable. However, the materials and procedures of the task may benefit from adaptations to be more accessible to individuals with cognitive and language disorders. Aims: This study aims to provide an overview of the iterative refinement process used to modify the materials and procedures of the PRO-bookmarking task so that they are more accessible to adults with acquired cognitive and language impairments. Method and Procedures: Our team of health psychologists, neuropsychologists, and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) conducted two focus groups with SLPs and care partners of people with aphasia using the same PRO-bookmarking materials and procedures as previous reports. These PRO-bookmarking materials and procedures were then refined iteratively based on discussion with those who participated in focus groups and among the research team, and three more times in the course of 16 additional focus groups of different stakeholders: people with Parkinson's disease, aphasia, or traumatic brain injury; care partners of people with those conditions; and SLPs who have experience with those, and other adult-acquired conditions. Outcomes and Results: The PRO-bookmarking materials and procedures underwent four iterations to make them clearer, simpler, and more accessible. For example, the materials included more structured text and graphic supports where appropriate and the procedures were clustered into smaller discrete tasks and displayed graphically when possible and appropriate. Conclusions: PRO-bookmarking materials and procedures were made simpler and more structured to increase their accessibility to adults with cognitive and language impairments. In fact, these adaptations made the tasks simpler and clearer for all types of stakeholders.

Study designThis is a focused review article.ObjectivesThis review presents important features of clinical outcomes assessments (COAs) in human spinal cord injury research. Considerations for COAs by trial phase and International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health are presented as well as strengths and recommendations for upper extremity COAs for research. Clinical trial tools and designs to address recruitment challenges are identified.MethodsThe methods include a summary of topics discussed during a two-day workshop, conceptual discussion of upper extremity COAs and additional focused literature review.ResultsCOAs must be appropriate to trial phase and particularly in mid-late-phase trials, should reflect recovery vs. compensation, as well as being clinically meaningful. The impact and extent of upper vs. lower motoneuron disease should be considered, as this may affect how an individual may respond to a given therapeutic. For trials with broad inclusion criteria, the content of COAs should cover all severities and levels of SCI. Specific measures to assess upper extremity function as well as more comprehensive COAs are under development. In addition to appropriate use of COAs, methods to increase recruitment, such as adaptive trial designs and prognostic modeling to prospectively stratify heterogeneous populations into appropriate cohorts should be considered.ConclusionsWith an increasing number of clinical trials focusing on improving upper extremity function, it is essential to consider a range of factors when choosing a COA.SponsorsCraig H. Neilsen Foundation, Spinal Cord Outcomes Partnership Endeavor.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the internal consistency and construct validity of the Traumatic Brain Injury Quality of Life Communication Item Bank (TBI-QOL COM) short form as a parent-proxy report measure. The TBI-QOL COM is a patient-reported outcome measure of functional communication originally developed as a self-report measure for adults with traumatic brain injury (TBI), but it may also be valid as a parent-proxy report measure for children who have sustained TBI. Method: One hundred twenty-nine parent-proxy raters completed the TBI-QOL COM short form 6 months postinjury as a secondary aim of a multisite study of pediatric TBI outcomes. The respondents' children with TBI were between 8 and 18 years old (M[subscript age] = 13.2 years old) at the time of injury, and the proportion of TBI severity mirrored national trends (73% complicated-mild; 27% moderate or severe). Results: The parent-proxy report version of the TBI-QOL COM displayed strong internal consistency (ordinal [alpha] = 0.93). It also displayed evidence of known-groups validity by virtue of more severe injuries associated with more abnormal scores. The instrument also showed evidence of convergent and discriminant validity by displaying a pattern of correlations with other constructs according to their conceptual relatedness to functional communication. Conclusions: This preliminary psychometric investigation of the TBI-QOL COM supports the further development of a parent report version of the instrument. Future development of the TBI-QOL COM with this population may include expanding the content of the item bank and developing calibrations specifically for parent-proxy raters.

Objective: Symptom clustering research provides a unique opportunity for understanding complex medical conditions. The objective of this study was to apply a variable-centered analytic approach to understand how symptoms may cluster together, within and across domains of functioning in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia, to better understand these conditions and potential etiological, prevention, and intervention considerations. Method: Cognitive, motor, sensory, emotional, and social measures from the NIH Toolbox were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) from a dataset of 165 individuals with a research diagnosis of either amnestic MCI or dementia of the Alzheimer's type. Results: The six-factor EFA solution described here primarily replicated the intended structure of the NIH Toolbox with a few deviations, notably sensory and motor scores loading onto factors with measures of cognition, emotional, and social health. These findings suggest the presence of cross-domain symptom clusters in these populations. In particular, negative affect, stress, loneliness, and pain formed one unique symptom cluster that bridged the NIH Toolbox domains of physical, social, and emotional health. Olfaction and dexterity formed a second unique cluster with measures of executive functioning, working memory, episodic memory, and processing speed. A third novel cluster was detected for mobility, strength, and vision, which was considered to reflect a physical functioning factor. Somewhat unexpectedly, the hearing test included did not load strongly onto any factor. Conclusion: This research presents a preliminary effort to detect symptom clusters in amnestic MCI and dementia using an existing dataset of outcome measures from the NIH Toolbox. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To provide reliability and validity data to support the clinical utility of Economic Quality of Life Measure (Econ-QOL) scores in caregivers of civilians and service members/veterans with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Cross-sectional survey study. Three academic medical centers and a Veterans Affairs treatment facility. 376 caregivers of civilians (n=213) and service members/veterans (n=163) with TBI (N=376). N/A. Econ-QOL and several patient-reported outcome measures (Traumatic Brain Injury Caregiver Quality of Life Caregiver-Specific Anxiety and Caregiver Strain, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System sleep-related impairment, Neurological Quality of Life Measurement System positive affect and well-being) and measures of financial status (self-reported income). Internal consistency reliability of the Econ-QOL Short Form scores were excellent (all Cronbach's alphas ≥.92). There were no floor or ceiling effects for scores. There was evidence of convergent and discriminant validity, with the Econ-QOL scores having the strongest relationships with self-reported income (convergent validity evidence) and weak relationships with the other measures (discriminant validity evidence). Individuals with scores that were "below or possibly below" the poverty line (according to 2016 federal government poverty level thresholds) reported worse economic quality of life relative to those individuals who were definitely above the poverty line, supporting known-groups validity. This article establishes the clinical utility of scores on the Econ-QOL Short Form in caregivers of persons with TBI and provides evidence that it is valid and appropriate to use such scores not only in a variety of different disability populations (eg, spinal cord injury, stroke) but also in caregivers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]