Association of Parent Ratings of Executive Function With Global- and Setting-Specific Behavioral Impairment After Adolescent Traumatic Brain Injury

Abstract Objective To determine the association of primary caregiver-rated behavioral and metacognitive aspects of executive function (EF) with impaired functioning after adolescent traumatic brain injury (TBI). Design Multicenter cross-sectional study. Setting Outpatient. Participants Primary careg...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation 2013-03, Vol.94 (3), p.543-550
Hauptverfasser: Kurowski, Brad G., MD, MS, Wade, Shari L., PhD, Kirkwood, Michael W., PhD, Brown, Tanya M., PhD, Stancin, Terry, PhD, Cassedy, Amy, PhD, Taylor, H. Gerry, PhD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Objective To determine the association of primary caregiver-rated behavioral and metacognitive aspects of executive function (EF) with impaired functioning after adolescent traumatic brain injury (TBI). Design Multicenter cross-sectional study. Setting Outpatient. Participants Primary caregivers and children (N=132) aged 12 to 17 years who sustained a moderate or severe TBI within the past 1 to 6 months. Interventions Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures Primary caregiver ratings of EF, tests of memory and processing speed (PS), and a structured parent interview to assess clinical impairments in behavioral functioning were used. Logistic regression was used to examine the relation of ratings of EF with clinical ratings of impairment in global adolescent functioning and in functioning in the home, school, and community settings after controlling for sex, race, socioeconomic status, injury severity, and performance on the tests of memory and PS. Results Caregiver ratings of poor EF were associated with impairment in both global behavioral functioning (odds ratio [OR]=4.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.54–14.52; P
ISSN:0003-9993
1532-821X
DOI:10.1016/j.apmr.2012.10.029