Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:01:39.153Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparing Traumatic Brain Injury Symptoms Reported via Questionnaires Versus a Novel Structured Interview

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2021

Natalie A. Emmert
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
Georgia Ristow
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
Michael A. McCrea
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA Department of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA Clement J. Zablocki Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI, USA
Terri A. deRoon-Cassini
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Division of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
Lindsay D. Nelson*
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA Department of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
*
Correspondence and reprint requests to: Lindsay Nelson, PhD, 8701 West Watertown Plank Road, Milwaukee, WI53226, USA. Email: linelson@mcw.edu

Abstract

Objective:

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) symptoms are typically assessed via questionnaires in research, yet questionnaires may be more prone to biases than direct clinical interviews. We compared mTBI symptoms reported on two widely used self-report inventories and the novel Structured Interview of TBI Symptoms (SITS). Second, we explored the association between acquiescence response bias and symptom reporting across modes of assessment.

Method:

Level 1 trauma center patients with mTBI (N = 73) were recruited within 2 weeks of injury, assessed at 3 months post-TBI, and produced nonacquiescent profiles. Assessments collected included the SITS (comprising open-ended and closed-ended questions), Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPQ), Sport Concussion Assessment Tool-3 (SCAT-3) symptom checklist, and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form True Response Inconsistency (TRIN-r) scale.

Results:

Current mTBI symptom burden and individual symptom endorsement were highly concordant between SITS closed-ended questions, the RPQ, and the SCAT-3. Within the SITS, participants reported significantly fewer mTBI symptoms to open-ended as compared to later closed-ended questions, and this difference was weakly correlated with TRIN-r. Symptom scales were weakly associated with TRIN-r.

Conclusions:

mTBI symptom reporting varies primarily by whether questioning is open- vs. closed-ended but not by mode of assessment (interview, questionnaire). Acquiescence response bias appears to play a measurable but small role in mTBI symptom reporting overall and the degree to which participants report more symptoms to closed- than open-ended questioning. These findings have important implications for mTBI research and support the validity of widely used TBI symptom inventories.

Type
Regular Research
Copyright
Copyright © INS. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baumgartner, H., & Steenkamp, J.E.M. (2006). Response bias in marketing research. In Grover, R. & Vriens’, M. (Eds.), The handbook of marketing research: Uses, misuses, and future advances (pp. 95109). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 57, 289300.Google Scholar
Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Tellegen, A. (2008). MMPI–2–RF (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2 Restructured Form): Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Bonett, D.G., & Wright, T.A. (2000). Sample size requirements for estimating Pearson, Kendall, and Spearman correlations. Psychometrika, 65(1), 2328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broglio, S.P., Cantu, R.C., Goia, G.A., Guskiewcz, K.M., Kutcher, J., Palm, M., & Valovich McLeod, T.C. (2014). National Athletic Trainers’ Association Position Statement: Management of Sport Concussion. Journal of Athletic Training, 49(2), 245265.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butcher, J.N., Gass, C.S., Cumella, E., Kally, Z., & Williams, C.L. (2008). Potential for bias in MMPI-2 assessments using the Fake Bad Scale (FBS). Psychological Injury & Law, 1, 191209. doi: 10.1007/s12207-007-9002-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, R.C. (2001). Base rate of post-concussion symptoms among normal people and its neuropsychological correlates. Clinical Rehabilitation, 15(3), 266273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cicerone, K.D., & Kalmar, K. (1995). Persistent postconcussion syndrome: The structure of subjective complaints after mTBI. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 10, 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancey, C.P., & Reidy, J. (2007). Statistics without maths for psychology (4th edition). Harlow, England: Pearson/Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Davison, T.E., McCabe, M.P., & Mellor, D. (2009). An examination of the “gold standard” diagnosis of major depression in age-care settings.” American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 17(5), 359367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Decaluwé, V., & Braet, C. (2004). Assessment of eating disorder psychopathology in obese children and adolescents: interview versus self-report questionnaire. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42(7), 799811. Doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2003.07.008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edmed, S., & Sullivan, K.A. (2012). Base rates of postconcussion syndrome by method of symptom report. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 19, 164170. doi: 10.1080/09084282.2011.643961 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edmed, S., & Sullivan, K.A. (2014). Method of symptom assessment influences cognitive, affective and somatic post-concussion-like symptom base rates. Brain Injury, 28(10), 12771282. doi: 10.3109/02699052.2014.915988 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edmed, S., Sullivan, K.A., Allan, A.C., & Smith, S.S. (2015). Assessment method influences the severity and type of symptoms reported after self-reported mild traumatic brain injury. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 37(6), 641652. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2015.1038984 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eyres, S., Carey, A., Gilworth, G., Neumann, V., & Tennent, A. (2005). Construct validity and reliability of the Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire. Clinical Rehabilitation, 19, 878887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, A. (2013). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
Gass, C.S., & Odland, A. (2012). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2 Revised Form Symptom Validity Scale–Revised (MMPI–2–RF FBS–r; also known as Fake Bad Scale): Psychometric characteristics in a nonlitigation neuropsychological setting. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 34(6), 561570. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2012.666228 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, D.J., & Schraa, J.C. (1995). Mild traumatic brain injury: Searching for the syndrome. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 10(4), 2840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gouvier, W.D., Uddo-Crane, M., & Brown, L.M. (1988). Base rates of postconcussional symptoms. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 3, 273278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunstad, J., & Suhr, J.A. (2001). “Expectation as etiology” versus “the good old days”: Postconcussion syndrome symptom reporting in athletes, headache sufferers, and depressed individuals. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 7, 323333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guskiewicz, K.M., Register-Mihalik, J., McCrory, P., McCrea, M., Johnston, K., Makdissi, M.Meeuwisse, W. (2013). Evidence-based approach to revising the SCAT2: Introducing the SCAT3. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 47, 289293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harfmann, E.J., deRoon-Cassini, T.A., McCrea, M., Nader, A., & Nelson, L. (2020). Comparison of four quality of life inventories for patients with traumatic brain injuries and orthopedic injuries. Journal of Neurotrauma, epub ahead of print, doi.org/10.1089/neu.2019.6746 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iverson, G.L., Brooks, B.L., Ashton, V.L., & Lange, R.T. (2010). Interview versus questionnaire symptom reporting in people with the postconcussion syndrome. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 25(1), 2330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iverson, G.L., & Lange, R.T. (2003). Examination of “postconcussion-like” symptoms in a healthy sample. Applied Neuropsychology, 10, 137144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, N., Crawford, S., Wenden, F., Moss, N., & Wade, D. (1995) The Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire: A measure of symptoms commonly experienced after head injury and its reliability. Journal of Neurology, 242, 587592.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kondiles, B., Starr, C.R., Larson, E.B., & Zollman, F. (2015). Method of assessment and symptom reporting in veterans with mild traumatic brain injury. Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine, 3(1), 111. doi: 10.1080/21642850.2014.966717 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krol, A., Mrazik, M., Naidu, D., Brooks, B.L., & Iverson, G.L. (2011). Assessment of symptoms in a concussion management programme: Method influences outcome. Brain Injury, 25(13–14), 13001305. doi: 10.3109/02699052.2011.624571 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menon, D.K., Schwab, K., Wright, D.W., Maas, A., & The Demographics and Clinical Assessment Working Group of the International and Interagency Initiative toward Common Data Elements for Research on Traumatic Brain Injury and Psychological Health. (2010). Position statement: Definition of traumatic brain injury. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 91(11), 16371640.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mittenberg, W., DiGuilio, D., Perrin, S., & Bass, A. (1992). Symptoms following mild head injury: Expectation as aetiology. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 55, 200204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nolin, P., Villemure, R., & Heroux, L. (2006). Determining long-term symptoms following mild traumatic brain injury: Method of interview affects self-report. Brain Injury, 20(11), 11471154. doi: 10.1080/02699050601049247 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nordgaard, J., Revsbech, R., Sæbye, D., & Parnas, J. (2012). Assessing the diagnostic validity of a structured psychiatric interview in a first-admission hospital sample. World Psychiatry, 11, 181185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, L.M., & Warden, D.L. (2003). Post concussion syndrome. International Review of Psychiatry, 15, 310316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sigurdardottir, S., Andelic, N., Roe, C., Jerstad, T., & Schanke, A., (2009) Post-concussion symptoms after traumatic brain injury at 3 and 12 months postinjury: A prospective study. Brain Injury, 23(6), 489497. doi: 10.1080/02699050902926309 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stapleton, E., & Mills, R. (2008). Role of open-ended questionnaires in patients with balance symptoms. Journal of Laryngology & Otology, 122, 139144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Villemure, R., Nolin, P., & Le Sage, N. (2011). Self-reported symptoms during post-mild traumatic brain injury in acute phase: Influence of interviewing method. Brain Injury, 25(1), 5364.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkinson, G.S., & Robertson, G.J. (2006). Wide range achievement test (WRAT4). Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Wood, R.L. (2004). Understanding the ‘miserable minority’: A diathesis-stress paradigm for post-concussional syndrome. Brain Injury, 18(11), 11351153. doi: 10.1080/02699050410001675906 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, M. (2003). What should the standard of care for psychiatric diagnostic evaluations be? The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 191, 281286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar