Executive functioning, attention and frontal lesions in patients with chronic CHI

To study the presence and nature of dysexecutive problems after CHI, a series of unstructured tasks tapping executive functioning were selected. These were administered to a group of 51 participants with CHI in the chronic stage (i.e. several years post-injury) and to 45 healthy controls. In addition, well-known structured tests of attention and planning were administered. Of the executive tasks, only the Executive Route Finding task showed a significant difference between both groups. A multivariate analysis on the attention tests showed a significant difference between groups, indicating that patients in the chronic stage still process information slower than controls. Within the patient group, patients with and without frontal focal lesions were also compared on executive and attention tests. No differences were found with respect to the latter. However, patients with frontal lesions performed worse on a measure of the Executive Route Finding task. It is concluded that patients with CHI, especially when they have frontal damage, have to rely more heavily on externally provided cues, but this dysexecutive problem can only be demonstrated in tasks that resemble daily life tasks by providing very little structure

Deficits of attention after closed-head injury:Slowness only?

The performance of a group of 60 severely closed-head-injured patients in the subacute stage of recovery on a series of tests addressing focused, divided, and sustained attention, and supervisory attentional control was compared to the performance of a matched group of 60 healthy controls. Patients performed significantly worse on each test with time pressure (those addressing focused and divided attention), indicating basic slowness of information processing, and on the self-paced tasks for supervisory attentional control. No indication was found of a sustained attention deficit. In a subsequent analysis the influence of the demonstrated slowness of information processing and other possibly confounding cognitive factors was controlled for by means of covariance analyses. This resulted in a disappearance of group differences on tests for focused and divided attention. The only difference that remained concerned a test for supervisory attentional control