An investigation into discrepancies between self- and carer rating responses to the European Brain Injury Questionnaire (EBIQ) in a Community Head Injury Service Andrew Bateman PhD MCSP Psaila,K.,Bundock,K., Moss,S.,Palmer,H.,Hutchinson,P., Allanson,J. Evelyn Community Head Injury Service SRR meeting, London, July 2006 INS meeting, Zurich, July 2006 INS satellite meeting, Leichtenstein, August 2006 10th Anniversary Conference, November 2006 UK Rasch User Group, Feb 2007 SRR meeting, Preston, July 2008 SRR Meeting, Bath, Jan 2012
Another presentation I have given at the SRR. This is from the 2013 Winter Meeting in Bath. The European Brain Injury Questionnaire is a useful tool for capturing self and proxy ratings of symptom frequency. We have been using at Oliver Zan gwill Centre since the unit opened, and have amassed a substantial database that is yielding valuable insights for prioritising services.
For me, the interesting message in this latest research is that there is a range of types of self-proxy discrepancies in the different EBIQ domains. I have been doing work on the EBIQ questionnaire for some years now, do contact me for more information about this symptom checklist.
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
An investigation into discrepancies between self- and carer rating responses to the
European Brain Injury Questionnaire (EBIQ) in a Community Head Injury Service
SRR meeting, London, July 2006INS meeting, Zurich, July 2006INS satellite meeting, Leichtenstein, August 200610th Anniversary Conference, November 2006UK Rasch User Group, Feb 2007SRR meeting, Preston, July 2008SRR Meeting, Bath, Jan 2012
How to start?•Evelyn Trust 5 year grant•Evelyn Neurorehabilitation
Project•Mapping current pathways•Referrals triaged via NT
Clinic
Aims To:•Provide timely, specialised,
assessment •Offer individualised holistic
rehabilitation and advice •Create county liaison / advice
network•Establish body of research to
inform future Neurorehab.
Who?Clinical Lead; Evelyn Consultant• Principal Clinical Psychologist • Psychology Assistant• OT – Advanced Practitioner• SALT – Advanced Specialist • Psychology Trainees and OT/ SALT studentsService Manager + Admin fromCambridgeshire Community Services`
Why? • Evidence; Cochrane Review;• Guidelines; NICE+NSF LTC• EoE Service Mapping • Gap in Cambridgeshire
• EBIQ contains 63 items proposed to constitute an overall measure of quality of life after brain injury.
• The questions are rated with 3 response categories indicating frequency of symptoms ("not at all", "a little", "a lot").
• Scoring range 63-189 (if you use total scores)• Self and carer rating versions• Validated subscales of the tool are related to
domains such as “cognitive”, “depression”, “social communication” and “physical(fatigue)” experiences.
Original questionnaire available fromhttp://teasdale.psy.ku.dk/ (for free)
Specific Research questions for this paper?
Compared to their relative/carer…
•How do people after brain injury report on their symptoms/quality of life
•Can we measure differences?
•Are the differences similar throughout domains e.g., as detected by subscales of the EBIQ
Method
•Data from 39 dyads of patient self ratings and carer ratings were entered into the analysis •Patients were a clinical sample of people triaged for assessment for rehab at neurotrauma clinic, •…where both sets of data available•The sample (64% male) •with traumatic brain injury (2-62 months prior to assessment) •consecutive referrals to Evelyn Community Head Injury Service.•Rasch validated subscales were used to create subscale scores.•Data entered into MS Excel, using simple functions such as “countif=“ to help create descriptive stats.
Results
1.On overall (unvalidated total score) analysis there was no difference between carer and patient total scores (e.g wilcoxon p=0.67).
1.Partitioning discrepancies into quartiles suggests thresholds fall at (Q1)=-11.5 suggesting unawareness, and (Q3) = +12 suggesting more endorsement of symptoms than their carer. Hence 25% of our sample had -12 EBIQ point difference from their partner and 25% reported more symptoms.