Diagnostic Accuracy of the Boston Assessment of Traumatic Brain Injury-Lifetime Clinical Interview Compared to Department of Defense Medical Records.

Sahra Kim, Alyssa Currao, Jennifer R Fonda, Brigitta Beck, Alexandra Kenna, Catherine B Fortier
{"title":"Diagnostic Accuracy of the Boston Assessment of Traumatic Brain Injury-Lifetime Clinical Interview Compared to Department of Defense Medical Records.","authors":"Sahra Kim, Alyssa Currao, Jennifer R Fonda, Brigitta Beck, Alexandra Kenna, Catherine B Fortier","doi":"10.1093/milmed/usac162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Since 2006, efforts have been made to increase the accurate identification of traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) in post-9/11 military personnel. The Boston Assessment of TBI-Lifetime (BAT-L) is the first validated instrument designed specifically to diagnose TBIs throughout the life span in post-9/11 Veterans. The objective was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the BAT-L with medical records from the Department of Defense (DoD).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Traumatic brain injury diagnosis for 153 Veterans deployed in 2011 enrolled in the Translational Research Center for TBI and Stress Disorder longitudinal cohort study from the BAT-L clinical interview was compared to DoD online medical records to determine diagnostic prevalence and injury severity for all head injury cases during deployment. Sensitivity, specificity, Cohen's kappa, and Kendall's tau-b were calculated for TBI diagnosis and severity. Concordant TBI cases and discordant TBI cases were compared using chi-square and t-test analyses. This study has been approved by VA Boston by Institutional Review Boards for human participants' protection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Correspondence of TBI diagnoses from the BAT-L with DoD records was fair (κ = 0.42; sensitivity = 72.7%; specificity = 82.8%). Comparison of injury severity also showed fair correspondence (κ = 0.41). Missing TBI diagnostic data from DoD records were frequent; 43% of TBIs reported on the BAT-L did not have any documentation of assessment or diagnoses in DoD records.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study addresses a critical gap in research by comparing the diagnostic accuracy of a validated, semi-structured clinical interview with available medical records. Diagnosis of TBIs via the BAT-L was both sensitive and specific when compared to DoD records, supporting the validity of the BAT-L for retrospective assessment of military TBI. However, diagnostic correspondence was only fair. This lack of diagnostic agreement was related to multiple factors including lack of documentation at the time of injury by DoD, differences in assessment and goals, and other combat-related motivational factors associated with failure to report injuries while deployed. Several policies have been implemented to address underreporting and under-documentation of TBIs, yet challenges remain. Recommendations for evaluating TBI are presented. Accurate diagnosis of TBI is necessary for appropriate treatment planning, as well as service-related compensation.</p>","PeriodicalId":86137,"journal":{"name":"Military surgeon","volume":" ","pages":"3561-3569"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Military surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usac162","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: Since 2006, efforts have been made to increase the accurate identification of traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) in post-9/11 military personnel. The Boston Assessment of TBI-Lifetime (BAT-L) is the first validated instrument designed specifically to diagnose TBIs throughout the life span in post-9/11 Veterans. The objective was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the BAT-L with medical records from the Department of Defense (DoD).

Material and methods: Traumatic brain injury diagnosis for 153 Veterans deployed in 2011 enrolled in the Translational Research Center for TBI and Stress Disorder longitudinal cohort study from the BAT-L clinical interview was compared to DoD online medical records to determine diagnostic prevalence and injury severity for all head injury cases during deployment. Sensitivity, specificity, Cohen's kappa, and Kendall's tau-b were calculated for TBI diagnosis and severity. Concordant TBI cases and discordant TBI cases were compared using chi-square and t-test analyses. This study has been approved by VA Boston by Institutional Review Boards for human participants' protection.

Results: Correspondence of TBI diagnoses from the BAT-L with DoD records was fair (κ = 0.42; sensitivity = 72.7%; specificity = 82.8%). Comparison of injury severity also showed fair correspondence (κ = 0.41). Missing TBI diagnostic data from DoD records were frequent; 43% of TBIs reported on the BAT-L did not have any documentation of assessment or diagnoses in DoD records.

Conclusion: This study addresses a critical gap in research by comparing the diagnostic accuracy of a validated, semi-structured clinical interview with available medical records. Diagnosis of TBIs via the BAT-L was both sensitive and specific when compared to DoD records, supporting the validity of the BAT-L for retrospective assessment of military TBI. However, diagnostic correspondence was only fair. This lack of diagnostic agreement was related to multiple factors including lack of documentation at the time of injury by DoD, differences in assessment and goals, and other combat-related motivational factors associated with failure to report injuries while deployed. Several policies have been implemented to address underreporting and under-documentation of TBIs, yet challenges remain. Recommendations for evaluating TBI are presented. Accurate diagnosis of TBI is necessary for appropriate treatment planning, as well as service-related compensation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
创伤性脑损伤波士顿评估的诊断准确性-与国防部医疗记录的终生临床访谈比较。
引言自2006年以来,一直在努力提高对9/11后军事人员创伤性脑损伤的准确识别。波士顿脑外伤终身评估(BAT-L)是第一个经过验证的专门用于诊断9/11后退伍军人终身脑外伤的仪器。目的是将BAT-L的诊断准确性与国防部的医疗记录进行比较。材料和方法将BAT-L临床访谈中的153名退伍军人的创伤性脑损伤诊断与国防部在线医疗记录进行对比确定部署期间所有头部损伤病例的诊断患病率和损伤严重程度。计算TBI诊断和严重程度的敏感性、特异性、Cohen’s kappa和Kendall’s tau-b。使用卡方和t检验分析比较一致性脑外伤病例和不一致性脑梗塞病例。这项研究已获得弗吉尼亚大学波士顿分校机构审查委员会的批准,以保护人类参与者。结果BAT-L的TBI诊断与DoD记录的相关性尚可(κ = 0.42;体贴 = 72.7%;特异性 = 82.8%)。损伤严重程度的比较也显示出相当的对应性(κ = 0.41)。国防部记录中的TBI诊断数据经常缺失;BAT-L报告的43%的TBI在国防部记录中没有任何评估或诊断文件。结论本研究通过将经过验证的半结构化临床访谈的诊断准确性与现有医疗记录进行比较,解决了研究中的一个关键差距。与国防部记录相比,通过BAT-L诊断TBI既敏感又特异,支持了BAT-L对军事TBI回顾性评估的有效性。然而,诊断对应只是公平的。这种诊断协议的缺乏与多种因素有关,包括国防部在受伤时缺乏文件、评估和目标的差异,以及与部署时未报告受伤相关的其他与战斗相关的动机因素。已经实施了一些政策来解决TBI报告不足和文件编制不足的问题,但挑战依然存在。提出了评估TBI的建议。TBI的准确诊断对于适当的治疗计划以及与服务相关的补偿是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Race Differences in Veteran's Affairs Emergency Department Utilization. Diagnostic Accuracy of the Boston Assessment of Traumatic Brain Injury-Lifetime Clinical Interview Compared to Department of Defense Medical Records. Symptoms and Central Sensory Integration in People With Chronic mTBI: Clinical Implications. Correlates of Dietary Behaviors Among Young Emirati Males Completing Compulsory Military Service. Physiological Demands and Characteristics of Movement During Simulated Combat.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1