Multiple self-reported concussions are more prevalent in athletes with ADHD and learning disability

Objective: We evaluated how attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and learning disability (LD) are associated with concussion history and performance on standard concussion assessment measures. Based on previous reports that developmental disorders are associated with increased injury proneness and poorer cognitive performance, we anticipated that ADHD and LD would be associated with increased history of concussion and poorer baseline performance on assessment measures. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Clinical research center. Participants: The study sample aggregated data from two separate projects: the National Collegiate Athletic Association Concussion Study and Project Sideline. Interventions: We analyzed preseason baseline data from 8056 high school and collegiate athletes (predominantly male football players) enrolled in prior studies of sport-related concussion. Main Outcome Measures: Measures included demographic/health history, symptoms, and cognitive performance. Results: Attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder and LD were associated with 2.93 and 2.08 times the prevalence, respectively, of 3+ historical concussions (for comorbid ADHD/LD the prevalence ratio was 3.38). In players without histories of concussion, individuals with ADHD reported more baseline symptoms, and ADHD and LD were associated with poorer performance on baseline cognitive tests. Interactive effects were present between ADHD/LD status and concussion history for self-reported symptoms. Conclusions: Neurodevelopmental disorders and concussion history should be jointly considered in evaluating concussed players. Clinical Relevance: Clinical judgments of self-reported symptoms and cognitive performance should be adjusted based on athletes' individual preinjury baselines or comparison with appropriate normative samples

Discrimination of schizophrenic and brain damaged patients by a standardized version of Luria\u27s neuropsychological tests

One of the major tests facing psychiatrists and mental health professionals is identifying psychiatric disorders which are caused by structural damage to the brain. Many psychological tests have frequently been used to do this, but extensive research has found most psychological tests to be ineffective in populations consisting of chronic schizophrenic patients. The present study evaluates the ability of a new test, based on the work of the Russian neuropsychologist, A. R. Luria, to discriminate between chronic schizophrenic and neurological patients. Results from earlier studies suggested that the battery is 88% effective in making these discriminations. The present study compared 50 schizophrenic and 50 neurological patients on the test battery. The results found that the Luria Neuropsychological Battery was extremely effective in making this discrimination, achieving an overall accuracy rate of 87%, far higher than the results reported for any psychological tests using a comparable population. Other advantages of the standardized Luria Neuropsychological Examination and its uses in psychiatric practice are discussed

Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery: Forms I & II

https://nsuworks.nova.edu/cps_facbooks/1371/thumbnail.jp

The effects of chronicity of disorder and length of hospitalization on the standardized version off Luria\u27s Neuropsychological Battery in a schizophrenic population.

Assessed whether chronicity of disorder and length of hospitalization affected the ability of the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery (LNNB) to discriminate between schizophrenic and brain damaged patients and the ways in which schizophrenic patients\u27 performance differed from normal controls\u27. In 72 patients (mean age 36.96 yrs) with varying degrees of chronicity and length of hospitalization, neither variable significantly affected LNNB scores. Schizophrenics, however, did differ significantly from controls and could be classified into 2 groups: one with performance clearly indicative of brain damage and one with performance clearly indicative of normal brain function. It is suggested that the actual presence of brain damage may be the key factor in overall group performance rather than factors such as chronicity of disorder and length of hospitalization, at least on the LNNB

Item Interpretation of the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery

The Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery is a relatively new neurodiagnostic test, and there is a growing demand for material on the more advanced aspects of its interpretation. This book, organized around the theoretical meaning of items, the empirical correlations between items, and the factor structure of the individual scales, is a first response to that demand. It will serve to give greater understanding of the psychological skills that underlie each item on the Luria-Nebraska battery—an understanding prerequisite to the techniques of “syndrome analysis” described in the writings of A. R. Luria—and it will be particularly useful to those who have limited experience with actual case material. The major part of the book is an analysis of each Luria-Nebraska scale, either item by item or as a unit. For each scale the authors examine the theoretical intent of the items and the underlying skills according to Luria’s theory. They then present the results of item interrelations analysis to determine whether the items tap common skills. Finally they describe the factor structure of the various scales, exploring the interrelations of items within each scale. In addition to analyzing the behavioral scales of the Luria-Nebraska battery, the book reviews a number of other empirical scales that further aid interpretation—particularly the experimental localization scales that tap focal deficits in specific areas of the brain. Also included are case histories that illustrate the process of diagnosis in patients who receive a series of Luria-Nebraska batteries over the course of their treatment. Finally, the authors briefly discuss subcortical disorders—an issue often ignored in clinical neuropsychological testing.https://nsuworks.nova.edu/cps_facbooks/1044/thumbnail.jp