Lange Rael T, Brickell Tracey A, French Louis M
a Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center , Bethesda , MD , USA.
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2015;37(3):325-37. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2015.1013021. Epub 2015 Apr 7.
The purpose of this study was to examine the clinical utility of two validity scales designed for use with the Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory (NSI) and the PTSD Checklist-Civilian Version (PCL-C); the Mild Brain Injury Atypical Symptoms Scale (mBIAS) and Validity-10 scale.
Participants were 63 U.S. military service members (age: M = 31.9 years, SD = 12.5; 90.5% male) who sustained a mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) and were prospectively enrolled from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. Participants were divided into two groups based on the validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF): (a) symptom validity test (SVT)-Fail (n = 24) and (b) SVT-Pass (n = 39). Participants were evaluated on average 19.4 months postinjury (SD = 27.6).
Participants in the SVT-Fail group had significantly higher scores (p < .05) on the mBIAS (d = 0.85), Validity-10 (d = 1.89), NSI (d = 2.23), and PCL-C (d = 2.47), and the vast majority of the MMPI-2-RF scales (d = 0.69 to d = 2.47). Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive power values were calculated across the range of mBIAS and Validity-10 scores to determine the optimal cutoff to detect symptom exaggeration. For the mBIAS, a cutoff score of ≥8 was considered optimal, which resulted in low sensitivity (.17), high specificity (1.0), high positive predictive power (1.0), and moderate negative predictive power (.69). For the Validity-10 scale, a cutoff score of ≥13 was considered optimal, which resulted in moderate-high sensitivity (.63), high specificity (.97), and high positive (.93) and negative predictive power (.83).
These findings provide strong support for the use of the Validity-10 as a tool to screen for symptom exaggeration when administering the NSI and PCL-C. The mBIAS, however, was not a reliable tool for this purpose and failed to identify the vast majority of people who exaggerated symptoms.
本研究旨在检验两种效度量表的临床效用,这两种量表专为与神经行为症状量表(NSI)和创伤后应激障碍检查表平民版(PCL-C)配合使用而设计;即轻度脑损伤非典型症状量表(mBIAS)和效度-10量表。
参与者为63名美国军人(年龄:M = 31.9岁,标准差 = 12.5;90.5%为男性),他们遭受了轻度创伤性脑损伤(MTBI),并从沃尔特里德国家军事医疗中心前瞻性招募。根据明尼苏达多相人格调查表第二版修订版(MMPI-2-RF)的效度量表,将参与者分为两组:(a)症状效度测试(SVT)未通过组(n = 24)和(b)SVT通过组(n = 39)。参与者在受伤后平均19.4个月接受评估(标准差 = 27.6)。
SVT未通过组的参与者在mBIAS(d = 0.85)、效度-10(d = 1.89)、NSI(d = 2.23)和PCL-C(d = 2.47)上的得分显著更高(p < .05),并且在绝大多数MMPI-2-RF量表上也是如此(d = 0.69至d = 2.47)。计算了mBIAS和效度-10得分范围内的敏感性、特异性和预测力值,以确定检测症状夸大的最佳临界值。对于mBIAS,临界值≥8被认为是最佳的,这导致敏感性较低(.17)、特异性较高(1.0)、阳性预测力较高(1.0)和阴性预测力中等(.69)。对于效度-10量表,临界值≥13被认为是最佳的,这导致中等偏高的敏感性(.63)、较高的特异性(.97)以及较高的阳性(.93)和阴性预测力(.83)。
这些发现为在使用NSI和PCL-C时使用效度-10作为筛查症状夸大的工具提供了有力支持。然而,mBIAS并非用于此目的的可靠工具,未能识别出绝大多数夸大症状的人。