Brett Benjamin L, Solomon Gary S
a Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology and Research , The University of Memphis , Memphis , TN , USA.
b Vanderbilt Sports Concussion Center , Nashville , TN , USA.
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2017 Apr;39(3):286-295. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2016.1224322. Epub 2016 Sep 2.
Research findings to date on the stability of Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) Composite scores have been inconsistent, requiring further investigation. The use of test validity criteria across these studies also has been inconsistent. Using multiple measures of stability, we examined test-retest reliability of repeated ImPACT baseline assessments in high school athletes across various validity criteria reported in previous studies.
A total of 1146 high school athletes completed baseline cognitive testing using the online ImPACT test battery at two time periods of approximately two-year intervals. No participant sustained a concussion between assessments. Five forms of validity criteria used in previous test-retest studies were applied to the data, and differences in reliability were compared.
Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) ranged in composite scores from .47 (95% confidence interval, CI [.38, .54]) to .83 (95% CI [.81, .85]) and showed little change across a two-year interval for all five sets of validity criteria. Regression based methods (RBMs) examining the test-retest stability demonstrated a lack of significant change in composite scores across the two-year interval for all forms of validity criteria, with no cases falling outside the expected range of 90% confidence intervals.
The application of more stringent validity criteria does not alter test-retest reliability, nor does it account for some of the variation observed across previously performed studies. As such, use of the ImPACT manual validity criteria should be utilized in the determination of test validity and in the individualized approach to concussion management. Potential future efforts to improve test-retest reliability are discussed.
迄今为止,关于脑震荡后即刻评估与认知测试(ImPACT)综合评分稳定性的研究结果并不一致,需要进一步调查。这些研究中测试有效性标准的使用也不一致。我们使用多种稳定性测量方法,根据先前研究报告的各种有效性标准,检验了高中运动员重复进行的ImPACT基线评估的重测信度。
共有1146名高中运动员在大约两年间隔的两个时间段使用在线ImPACT测试组合完成了基线认知测试。在两次评估之间没有参与者遭受脑震荡。将先前重测研究中使用的五种有效性标准形式应用于数据,并比较信度差异。
组内相关系数(ICC)在综合评分中范围为0.47(95%置信区间,CI[0.38,0.54])至0.83(95%CI[0.81,0.85]),并且在两年间隔内,所有五组有效性标准下的综合评分变化不大。基于回归的方法(RBM)检验重测稳定性表明,在两年间隔内,所有形式的有效性标准下综合评分均无显著变化,没有病例超出90%置信区间的预期范围。
应用更严格的有效性标准不会改变重测信度,也无法解释先前进行的研究中观察到的一些差异。因此,在确定测试有效性以及脑震荡管理的个体化方法中,应使用ImPACT手册中的有效性标准。讨论了未来提高重测信度的潜在努力。