Computerised cognitive assessment in patients with traumatic brain injury: an observational study of feasibility and sensitivity relative to established clinical scales.
Attention
Cognition
Deficits
Executive functions
Memory
Online assessment
Traumatic brain injury
Journal
EClinicalMedicine
ISSN: 2589-5370
Titre abrégé: EClinicalMedicine
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101733727
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2023
May 2023
Historique:
received:
08
02
2023
revised:
28
03
2023
accepted:
12
04
2023
medline:
8
5
2023
pubmed:
8
5
2023
entrez:
8
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Online technology could potentially revolutionise how patients are cognitively assessed and monitored. However, it remains unclear whether assessments conducted remotely can match established pen-and-paper neuropsychological tests in terms of sensitivity and specificity. This observational study aimed to optimise an online cognitive assessment for use in traumatic brain injury (TBI) clinics. The tertiary referral clinic in which this tool has been clinically implemented typically sees patients a minimum of 6 months post-injury in the chronic phase. Between March and August 2019, we conducted a cross-group, cross-device and factor analyses at the St. Mary's Hospital TBI clinic and major trauma wards at Imperial College NHS trust and St. George's Hospital in London (UK), to identify a battery of tasks that assess aspects of cognition affected by TBI. Between September 2019 and February 2020, we evaluated the online battery against standard face-to-face neuropsychological tests at the Imperial College London research centre. Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) determined the shared variance between the online battery and standard neuropsychological tests. Finally, between October 2020 and December 2021, the tests were integrated into a framework that automatically generates a results report where patients' performance is compared to a large normative dataset. We piloted this as a practical tool to be used under supervised and unsupervised conditions at the St. Mary's Hospital TBI clinic in London (UK). The online assessment discriminated processing-speed, visual-attention, working-memory, and executive-function deficits in TBI. CCA identified two significant modes indicating shared variance with standard neuropsychological tests (r = 0.86, p < 0.001 and r = 0.81, p = 0.02). Sensitivity to cognitive deficits after TBI was evident in the TBI clinic setting under supervised and unsupervised conditions (F (15,555) = 3.99; p < 0.001). Online cognitive assessment of TBI patients is feasible, sensitive, and efficient. When combined with normative sociodemographic models and autogenerated reports, it has the potential to transform cognitive assessment in the healthcare setting. This work was funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Invention for Innovation (i4i) grant awarded to DJS and AH (II-LB-0715-20006).
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Online technology could potentially revolutionise how patients are cognitively assessed and monitored. However, it remains unclear whether assessments conducted remotely can match established pen-and-paper neuropsychological tests in terms of sensitivity and specificity.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
This observational study aimed to optimise an online cognitive assessment for use in traumatic brain injury (TBI) clinics. The tertiary referral clinic in which this tool has been clinically implemented typically sees patients a minimum of 6 months post-injury in the chronic phase. Between March and August 2019, we conducted a cross-group, cross-device and factor analyses at the St. Mary's Hospital TBI clinic and major trauma wards at Imperial College NHS trust and St. George's Hospital in London (UK), to identify a battery of tasks that assess aspects of cognition affected by TBI. Between September 2019 and February 2020, we evaluated the online battery against standard face-to-face neuropsychological tests at the Imperial College London research centre. Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) determined the shared variance between the online battery and standard neuropsychological tests. Finally, between October 2020 and December 2021, the tests were integrated into a framework that automatically generates a results report where patients' performance is compared to a large normative dataset. We piloted this as a practical tool to be used under supervised and unsupervised conditions at the St. Mary's Hospital TBI clinic in London (UK).
Findings
UNASSIGNED
The online assessment discriminated processing-speed, visual-attention, working-memory, and executive-function deficits in TBI. CCA identified two significant modes indicating shared variance with standard neuropsychological tests (r = 0.86, p < 0.001 and r = 0.81, p = 0.02). Sensitivity to cognitive deficits after TBI was evident in the TBI clinic setting under supervised and unsupervised conditions (F (15,555) = 3.99; p < 0.001).
Interpretation
UNASSIGNED
Online cognitive assessment of TBI patients is feasible, sensitive, and efficient. When combined with normative sociodemographic models and autogenerated reports, it has the potential to transform cognitive assessment in the healthcare setting.
Funding
UNASSIGNED
This work was funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Invention for Innovation (i4i) grant awarded to DJS and AH (II-LB-0715-20006).
Identifiants
pubmed: 37152359
doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101980
pii: S2589-5370(23)00157-8
pmc: PMC10154960
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
101980Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Prof. Hampshire reports grants from NIHR, and is owner/director of H2 Cognitive Designs Ltd and Future Cognition Ltd, which produce online assessment technology and provide online survey data collection for third parties. Dr. Hellyer is co-founder and co-owner of H2 Cognitive Designs Ltd and H2 Cognitive Designs Ltd. Prof. Sharp reports grants from NIHR Invention for innovation (i4i); NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre; Advance Brain Health Clinic & Aligned Research programme Football Association (FA); Advance Brain Health Clinic & Aligned Research programme; Rugby Football Union & Premiership Rugby; ADVANCE Charity; Armed Services Trauma Rehabilitation Outcome Study (ADVANCE); Action Medical Research; UK Dementia Research Institute Care & Technology Centre; Era-Net-Neuron European collaborative award; St Mary’s Development Charity; Royal British Legion Centre for Blast Studies. Prof. Sharp also took park in the Early Detection of Neurodegenerative diseases (EDoN) project and the Rugby Football Union concussion advisory board. Mr. Trender reports payments from Imperial NHS trust, Imperial College London, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, and H2 Cognitive Designs Ltd. Dr. David reports grants from the Medical Research Council (Clinical Research Fellowship). Miss Bălăeţ reports payments from the Medical Research Council Doctoral Training Programme. Dr. Graham reports grants from Alzheimer’s Research UK (Clinical Research Fellowship). Mr. Friedland reports payments for expert testimony outside this study. Dr. Li reports grants from LML: UK DRI Pilot Grant 2021 and is trustee of Headway West London. Miss Helen Lai reports payments from Imperial College London (President’s PhD Scholarship) and the UK Dementia Research Institute Care & Technology Centre. Dr. Bourke reports payments for medicolegal imaging analysis outside this work and payments as part of the BRAN travel grant. All the other authors have nothing to disclose.
Références
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2006 May;28(4):567-80
pubmed: 16624784
Neuron. 2012 Dec 20;76(6):1225-37
pubmed: 23259956
Nat Rev Neurol. 2018 Dec;14(12):711-722
pubmed: 30397256
Nat Commun. 2021 Apr 6;12(1):2072
pubmed: 33824305
EClinicalMedicine. 2021 Sep;39:101044
pubmed: 34316551
Ann Neurol. 2015 Apr;77(4):571-81
pubmed: 25623048
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005 Apr;53(4):695-9
pubmed: 15817019
Clin Neuropsychol. 2018 Jan;32(1):16-41
pubmed: 28590154
J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 2011 Mar;49(3):42-50
pubmed: 21323264
Clin Neuropsychol. 2017 Jan;31(1):59-84
pubmed: 27266677
Neuropsychology. 2008 Sep;22(5):618-625
pubmed: 18763881
Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 May;5(5):424-431
pubmed: 29653873
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2012 May;27(3):362-73
pubmed: 22382386
Brain. 2019 Aug 1;142(8):2367-2379
pubmed: 31199462
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2021 Apr 16;30(2S):974-985
pubmed: 33556261
BMJ Open. 2014 Dec 14;4(12):e006434
pubmed: 25500772
NeuroRehabilitation. 2019;44(3):321-331
pubmed: 31177238
EClinicalMedicine. 2022 May;47:101417
pubmed: 35505938
Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2020 Oct 14;12(1):e12098
pubmed: 33088895
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1998 Jun;20(3):310-9
pubmed: 9845158
J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2001 Aug;16(4):343-55
pubmed: 11461657
J Neurotrauma. 2023 Jan 27;:
pubmed: 36716779
Brain. 2020 Apr 1;143(4):1158-1176
pubmed: 32243506
J Neurotrauma. 2020 Sep 1;37(17):1845-1853
pubmed: 32345119
J Neurosurg. 2018 Apr 1;:1-18
pubmed: 29701556
Front Neurol. 2019 Feb 21;10:120
pubmed: 30846966
J Neurotrauma. 2007 Sep;24(9):1417-24
pubmed: 17892404
Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2015 Jun 30;11:1573-86
pubmed: 26170670
World Neurosurg. 2022 Nov;167:e998-e1005
pubmed: 36058487
Concussion. 2017 Jan 30;2(1):CNC31
pubmed: 30202572
Medscape J Med. 2008 Apr 15;10(4):90
pubmed: 18504479