a Brain Injury Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology , University of Texas Arlington , TX , USA .
Clin Neuropsychol. 2013;27(8):1265-80. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2013.845247. Epub 2013 Oct 8.
The ImPACT (Immediate Postconcussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing) is a computerized neurocognitive test used to assist in the management of sport concussion management. A number of studies have documented the reliability and sensitivity of the ImPACT, but no studies have examined the equivalence of the ImPACT's alternate forms. The objective of our study was to determine the equivalence of the ImPACT's five alternate forms. Participants were administered alternate forms of ImPACT based on clinically relevant time frame derived from an extensive sports concussion database. Participants completed a baseline assessment followed by various combinations of the remaining alternate forms at 45 and 50 days. Inferential Confidence Intervals were calculated for each composite score for all alternate forms. We found non-equivalence between ImPACT form 1 and forms 2, 3, and 4 on the Verbal Memory and between forms 2 and 4. ImPACT forms 1 and 3 were not equivalent on the Visual Memory Composite. Finally, ImPACT forms 3 and 4 were not equivalent on the Visual Motor Speed and Reaction Time Composites. Alternate form equivalence is necessary to minimize measurement error and optimize clinical decision making. Clinicians using the ImPACT should consider non-equivalence of some forms on certain Composites when interpreting ImPACT following sports concussion.
ImPACT（即时脑震荡后评估和认知测试）是一种用于辅助运动性脑震荡管理的计算机化神经认知测试。许多研究已经记录了 ImPACT 的可靠性和敏感性，但没有研究检查过 ImPACT 的备用形式的等效性。我们的研究目的是确定 ImPACT 的五个备用形式的等效性。根据从广泛的运动性脑震荡数据库中得出的临床相关时间框架，参与者接受了 ImPACT 的备用形式。参与者在基线评估后，在 45 天和 50 天接受剩余备用形式的各种组合。为所有备用形式的每个综合分数计算了推断置信区间。我们发现，在言语记忆方面，ImPACT 形式 1 与形式 2、3 和 4 之间以及在视觉记忆复合测试中，形式 2 和 4 之间存在不等效性。在视觉运动速度和反应时间复合测试中，ImPACT 形式 1 和 3 之间也没有等效性。最后，ImPACT 形式 3 和 4 在视觉运动速度和反应时间复合测试中也没有等效性。备用形式的等效性对于最小化测量误差和优化临床决策至关重要。在运动性脑震荡后解释 ImPACT 时，使用 ImPACT 的临床医生应考虑某些组合的某些形式不等效。
