Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2010.48.6.506

Development of a Cognitive Level Explanation Model in Brain Injury : Comparisons between Disability and Non-Disability Evaluation Groups  

Shin, Tae-Hee (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University)
Gong, Chang-Bong (Department of Neurosurgery, Dong Eui Medical Center)
Kim, Min-Su (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University)
Kim, Jin-Sung (Department of Psychiatry, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University)
Bai, Dai-Seg (Department of Psychiatry, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University)
Kim, Oh-Lyong (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society / v.48, no.6, 2010 , pp. 506-517 More about this Journal
Abstract
Objective : We investigated whether Disability Evaluation (DE) situations influence patients' neuropsychological test performances and psychopathological characteristics and which variable play a role to establish an explanation model using statistical analysis. Methods : Patients were 536 (56.6%) brain-injured persons who met inclusion and exclusion criteria, classified into the DE group (DE; n = 300, 56.0%) and the non-DE group (NDE; n = 236, 44.0%) according to the neuropsychological testing's purpose. Next, we classified DE subjects into DE cluster 1 (DEC1; 91, 17.0%), DE cluster 2 (DEC2; 125; 23.3%), and DE cluster 3 (DEC3; 84, 15.7%) via two-step cluster analysis, to specify DE characteristics. All patients completed the K-WAIS, K-MAS, K-BNT, SCL-90-R, and MMPI. Results : In comparisons between DE and NDE, the DE group showed lower intelligence quotients and more severe psychopathologic symptoms, as evaluated by the SCL-90-R and MMPI, than the NDE group did. When comparing the intelligence among the DE groups and NDE group, DEC1 group performed worst on intelligence and memory and had most severe psychopathologic symptoms than the NDE group did. The DEC2 group showed modest performance increase over the DEC1 and DEC3, similar to the NDE group. Paradoxically, the DEC3 group performed better than the NDE group did on all variables. Conclusion : The DE group showed minimal "faking bad" patterns. When we divided the DE group into three groups, the DEC1 group showed typical malingering patterns, the DEC2 group showed passive malingering patterns, and the DEC3 group suggested denial of symptoms and resistance to treatment.
Keywords
Disability evaluation; Brain injury; Malingering;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
Times Cited By Web Of Science : 0  (Related Records In Web of Science)
Times Cited By SCOPUS : 0
연도 인용수 순위
1 Kim JS, Kim OL, Seo WS, Koo BH, Joo Y, Bai DS : Memory dysfunction after mild and moderate traumatic brain injury : Comparison between patients with and without frontal lobe injury. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 46 : 459-467, 2009   과학기술학회마을   DOI
2 Oakley D : Hypnosis and conversion hysteria : a unifying model. Cogn Neuropsychiatry 4 : 243-265, 1999.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Wilson BA, Vizor A, Bryant T : Predicting severity of cognitive impairment after severe head injury. Brain Inj 5 : 189-197, 1991   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Iverson Gl, Binder LM : Detecting exaggeration and malingering in neuropsychological assessment. J Head Trauma Rehabil 15 : 829-858, 2000   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Johnson JL, Bellah CG, Dodge T, Kelley W, Livingston MM : Effect of warning on feigned malingering on the WAIS-R in college samples. Percept Mot Skills 87 : 152-154, 1998   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Johnstone L, Cooke DJ : Feigned intellectual deficits on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised. Br J Clin Psychol 42 : 303-318, 2003   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Boone KB : A reconsideration of the Slick er al.(1999) criteria for malingered neurocognitive function in Boone KB(eds) : Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment : A neuropsychological perspective. New York : The Guilford Press, 2007, pp29-49
8 Trueblood W : Qualitative and quantitative characteristics of malingered and other invalid WAIS-R and clinical memory data. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 16 : 597-607, 1994   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Yeom TH, Park YS, Oh KJ, Lee YH : Korean version Wechsler adult intelligence scale. Seoul : Korean Guidance, 1992
10 Youngjohn JR, Burrows L, Erdal K : Brain damage or compensation neurosis? The controveral post-concussion syndrome. Clin Neuropsychol 9 : 112-123, 1995   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Vogenthaler DR, Smith KR, Goldfader L : Head injury, an empirical study : Describing long-term productivity and independent living outcome. Brain Inj 3 : 355-368, 1989   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Prigatano GP : Psychotherapy after brain injury in Prigatano GP, Fordyce DJ, Zeiner HK, Baltimore MD (eds) : Neuropsychological rehabilitation after brain injury. Washington DC; Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986, pp67-95
13 Wechsler D : Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised. New York : The psychological corporation, 1981
14 Wiggins EC, Brandt J : The detection of simulated amnesia. Law Hum Behav 12 : 57-58, 1988   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Williams JM : Memory Assessment Scales. Odessa, FL : Psychological Assessment Resources, 1991
16 Mittenberg W, Theroux-Fichera S, Zielinski RE, Heilbronner RL : Identification of malingered head injury on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised. Prof Psychol Res Pr 26 : 491-498, 1995   DOI
17 Sierra M, Berrios GE : Towards a neuropsychiatry of conversive hysteria. Cogn Neuropsychiatry 4 : 267-287, 1999   DOI
18 Slick DJ, Sherman EM, Iverson GL : Diagnostic criteria for malingered neurocognitive dysfunction : Proposed standards for clinical practice and research. Clin Neuropsychol 13 : 545-561, 1999   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Mendelow AD, Teasdale G, Jennett B, et al. : Risks of intracranial haematoma in head injured adults. Br Med J 287 (Clin Res Ed) : 1173-1176, 1983   DOI
20 Newcombe F : Psychometric and behavioral evidence: Scope, limitations, and ecological validity in Lavin HS, Crafman J, Eisenberg HM (eds) : Neurobehavioral recovery from head injury. New York : Oxford University Press, 1987, pp129-145.
21 Levin HS : Memory deficit after closed head injury. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 12 : 129-153, 1990   DOI
22 Oddy M, Coughlan T, Tyerman A, Jenkins D : Social adjustment after closed-head injury : a further follow-up seven years after injury. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr 48 : 564-568, 1985   DOI
23 Park KC, Kim HJ : Psychosocial outcome after brain injury. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 29 : 196-202, 2000
24 Lee SW, Kim OL, Woo BG, Kim SH, Bae JH, Choi BY, Cho SH : Prognostic factors in patients with severe head injury. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 28 :1288-1292, 1999
25 Kim GI, Kim JH, Won HT : Symptom Checklist-90-Revised. Seoul : Jungangjeokseung Press, 1984
26 Lezak MD, Howieson DB, Loring DW, Hannay HJ, Fisher JS : Neuropsychological assessment, ed 4. New York : Oxford University Press, 2004, pp157-285
27 Lu PH, Rogers SA, Boone KB : Use of standard memory tests to detect suspect effort in Boone KB (eds) : Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment : A neuropsychological perspective. New York : The Guilford Press, 2007
28 Kelly R : The post-traumatic syndrome: An iatrogenic disease. Forensic Sci 6 : 17-24, 1975   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Kim HG : Estimating premorbid intelligence estimation: after year 2001. Korean J Clin Psychol 29 : 155-164, 2001
30 Bryant RA, McConkey KM : Functional blindness: A construction of cognitive and social influences. Cogn Neuropsychiatry 4 : 227-241, 1999   DOI
31 Delis DC : Neuropsychological assessment in learning and memory in Boller F, Grartman J (eds) : Handbook of neuropsychology. Amsterdam : Elsevier, 1991, pp3-33
32 Derogatis LR, Lipman RS, Covi L : An outpatient psychiatric rating scale- preliminary report. Psychopharmacol Bull 9 : 13-28, 1973
33 Gouvier WD, Prestholdt PH, Warner MS : A survey common misconceptions about head injury and recovery. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 3 : 331-343, 1988   DOI
34 Larrabee GJ : A scientific approach to forensic neuropsychology in Larrabee GJ (eds) : Forensic neuropsychology : A scientific approach. New York : Oxford University Press, 2005, pp3-28
35 Kim HH, Na DY : The Korean version Boston Naming Test. Seoul : Hakjisa, 1997
36 Kim YH, Kim JH, Kim JS, Rho ML, Yeon TH, Oh SW : The Korean version Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. Seoul : Korean Guidance, 1989
37 Koo BH, Bai DS : The comparison of Psychiatric symptoms in traumatic brain injury with and without intelligence and memory impairments. J Korean Soc Biol Ther Psychiatry 12 : 182-195, 2006
38 Larrabee GJ : Forensic neuropychological assessment in Vanderploeg RD (eds) : Clinical guide to neuropsychological assessment, ed 2. Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum, 2000, pp.301-335
39 Lee HS, Park BG, Ahn CI, Kim MLH, Jeung IG : Korean version of memory assessment scales. Seoul : Korean Guidance, 2001
40 Lee JB, Kim OL, Kim JS, Seo WS, Bai DS : The study of subjective symptoms of traumatic brain injury patients using structured evaluation and neuropsychological tests. J Korean Soc Biol Ther Psychiatry 9 : 213-234, 2003
41 Lee KS : Assessment of physical impairment and disability evaluation: Problem of present system and design for better system. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 23 : 276-282, 1994
42 Gronwall D : Behavioral assessment during the acute stages of traumatic brain injury in Lezak MD (eds) : Assessment of the behavioral consequences of head trauma. Vol. 7. Frontiers of clinical neuroscience. New York : Alan R. Liss, 1989, pp72-89
43 Board J, Goodglass H, Kaplan E : Normative data on the Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination, parietal lobe and the Boston Naming Test. J Clin Neuropsychol 2 : 209-215, 1980   DOI
44 Arcia E, Gualtieri CT : Association between patient report of symptoms after mild head injury and neurobehavioural performance. Brain Inj 7 : 481-489, 1993
45 Bernard LC, McGrath MJ, Houston W : Discriminating between simulated malingering and closed head injury on the Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 8 : 539-551, 1993   DOI