29 Predictors of Verbal Memory Performance Following Brain Injury Among Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence

Abstract

Objective:

Numerous survivors of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) experience physical violence to the head and neck areas, placing them at high risk of sustaining a brain injury (BI). Studies report that the prevalence of traumatic BI among IPV survivors ranges from 35% to as much as 80%. IPV-related BIs can have debilitating long-term consequences on survivors’ quality of life and overall functioning. One important factor impacting quality of life following TBI is verbal memory abilities. Given the link between verbal memory abilities and functional status, identifying predictors of verbal memory performance has important implications for directing support and rehabilitative efforts for survivors of IPV-related BIs. The current aim of the study was to investigate predictors of verbal memory performance following TBI among survivors of IPV.

Participants and Methods:

A modified HELPS Brain Injury (BI) screener was administered to women receiving services for IPV through community organizations and shelters in two urban, Midwestern cities. Women who screened positive for IPV-related BI (n=32) were invited to complete a comprehensive neuropsychological evaluation including the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test. The delayed recall score of the RAVLT was used as a measure of verbal memory performance. BI history and characteristics were based on survivors’ responses to the modified HELPS screener. Multiple regression was used to determine significant predictors of verbal performance with RAVLT-Delayed Recall scores serving as the criterion, and education, age, number of reported injuries, number of injuries that left participants feeling dazed/confused, following provider recommendations, and childhood history of injury all entered as predictors.

Results:

The model indicated that a large percentage of the variability (R2 = .378) in delayed recall performance could be attributed to the combination of predictors in the model (F (6, 25) = 2.828, p = .047). Examination of the regression coefficients indicated that only following provider recommendations (ß = .420, p = .019), and number of injuries that induced disorientation/confusion (ß = -.592, p = .004) were significantly related to delayed recall after controlling for all other variables in the model.

Conclusions:

The results of this study suggest that injury severity and adhering to medical recommendations after IPV-related TBI play a significant role in predicting cognitive functioning. Consistent with existing literature, our findings show that injury characteristics of severity and repetition are closely associated with memory functioning. These findings have implications for guiding screening procedures that may be more sensitive to functional outcome in survivors of IPV who are at risk for BI. Furthermore, our findings highlight a need to increase awareness of IPV-related BI in medical professionals, and to support these front-line staff in providing medical care and psychoeducation about BI to IPV survivors.