-
Journal of neurotrauma · Apr 2015
Structured interview for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury after military blast: interrater agreement and development of diagnostic algorithm.
- William C Walker, David X Cifu, Anne M Hudak, Gary Goldberg, Richard D Kunz, and Adam P Sima.
- 1 Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond, Virginia.
- J. Neurotrauma. 2015 Apr 1;32(7):464-73.
AbstractThe existing gold standard for diagnosing a suspected previous mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is clinical interview. But it is prone to bias, especially for parsing the physical versus psychological effects of traumatic combat events, and its inter-rater reliability is unknown. Several standardized TBI interview instruments have been developed for research use but have similar limitations. Therefore, we developed the Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) retrospective concussion diagnostic interview, blast version (VCU rCDI-B), and undertook this cross-sectional study aiming to 1) measure agreement among clinicians' mTBI diagnosis ratings, 2) using clinician consensus develop a fully structured diagnostic algorithm, and 3) assess accuracy of this algorithm in a separate sample. Two samples (n = 66; n = 37) of individuals within 2 years of experiencing blast effects during military deployment underwent semistructured interview regarding their worst blast experience. Five highly trained TBI physicians independently reviewed and interpreted the interview content and gave blinded ratings of whether or not the experience was probably an mTBI. Paired inter-rater reliability was extremely variable, with kappa ranging from 0.194 to 0.825. In sample 1, the physician consensus prevalence of probable mTBI was 84%. Using these diagnosis ratings, an algorithm was developed and refined from the fully structured portion of the VCU rCDI-B. The final algorithm considered certain symptom patterns more specific for mTBI than others. For example, an isolated symptom of "saw stars" was deemed sufficient to indicate mTBI, whereas an isolated symptom of "dazed" was not. The accuracy of this algorithm, when applied against the actual physician consensus in sample 2, was almost perfect (correctly classified = 97%; Cohen's kappa = 0.91). In conclusion, we found that highly trained clinicians often disagree on historical blast-related mTBI determinations. A fully structured interview algorithm was developed from their consensus diagnosis that may serve to enhance diagnostic standardization for clinical research in this population.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.