Vanderploeg Rodney D, Silva Marc A, Soble Jason R, Curtiss Glenn, Belanger Heather G, Donnell Alison J, Scott Steven G
Mental Health and Behavioral Sciences Service (Drs Vanderploeg, Silva, Soble, Curtiss, Belanger, and Donnell), Health Services Research and Development (HSR&D)/Rehabilitation Research and Development (RR&D) Center of Excellence: Maximizing Rehabilitation Outcomes (Drs Vanderploeg, Belanger, and Scott), and Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Service (Dr Scott), James A. Haley Veterans' Hospital, Tampa, Florida; Departments of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences (Drs Vanderploeg, Silva, Curtiss, and Belanger) and Psychology (Drs Vanderploeg and Belanger), University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida; and Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center, Tampa, Florida (Drs Vanderploeg, Belanger, Donnell, and Scott).
J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2015 Jan-Feb;30(1):1-11. doi: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000009.
To evaluate and compare the existing Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory factor structure models to determine which model provides the best overall fit for postconcussion symptoms and determine which model is useful across different samples (eg, with and without mild traumatic brain injury [TBI] history).
N/A.
A Florida National Guard sample (N = 3098) and a national Department of Veterans Affairs sample (N = 48,175).
Retrospective structural equation modeling was used to compare 16 alternative factor structure models. First, these 16 possible models were examined separately in both samples. Then, to determine whether the same factor structures applied across subsamples within these samples, the models were compared for those deployed and those not deployed in the Florida National Guard sample and between those with TBI confirmed on clinical evaluation and those who were determined not to have sustained a TBI within the Department of Veterans Affairs sample.
Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory.
A 4-factor model--vestibular, somatic, cognitive, and affective--had the best overall fit, after elimination of 2 items (ie, hearing problems and appetite disturbance), and was most applicable across samples.
These findings extend the findings of Meterko et al to other samples. Because findings were consistent across sample and subsamples, the current findings are applicable to both Department of Veteran Affairs and Department of Defense postdeployment medical evaluation settings.
评估并比较现有的神经行为症状量表因子结构模型，以确定哪种模型对脑震荡后症状的整体拟合度最佳，并确定哪种模型在不同样本（例如，有和没有轻度创伤性脑损伤 [TBI] 病史的样本）中都适用。
无。
佛罗里达国民警卫队样本（N = 3098）和退伍军人事务部全国样本（N = 48175）。
采用回顾性结构方程模型来比较16种替代因子结构模型。首先，在两个样本中分别检验这16种可能的模型。然后，为了确定这些样本中的子样本是否适用相同的因子结构，对佛罗里达国民警卫队样本中已部署和未部署的人员，以及退伍军人事务部样本中经临床评估确诊为TBI的人员和被确定未遭受TBI的人员之间的模型进行比较。
神经行为症状量表。
在剔除2个项目（即听力问题和食欲紊乱）后，一个4因子模型——前庭、躯体、认知和情感——具有最佳的整体拟合度，并且在各个样本中最适用。
这些发现将梅特科等人的研究结果扩展到了其他样本。由于研究结果在样本和子样本中保持一致，当前的研究结果适用于退伍军人事务部和国防部部署后医学评估环境。
