Traumatic brain injury (TBI) can negatively impact patients' lives on many dimensions. Multiple instruments are available for evaluating TBI outcomes, but it is still unclear which instruments are... Show moreTraumatic brain injury (TBI) can negatively impact patients' lives on many dimensions. Multiple instruments are available for evaluating TBI outcomes, but it is still unclear which instruments are the most sensitive for that purpose. This study examines the sensitivity of nine outcome instruments in terms of their ability to discriminate within and between specific patient groups, selected a priori as identified from the literature, at three different time points within a year after TBI (i.e., 3, 6, and 12 months post injury). The sensitivity of the instruments to sociodemographic (sex, age, education), premorbid (psychological health status), and injury-related (clinical care pathways, TBI and extracranial injury severity) factors was assessed by means of cross-sectional multivariate Wei-Lachin analyses. The Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE)-the standard in the field of TBI for measuring functional recovery-demonstrated the highest sensitivity in most group comparisons. However, as single functional scale, it may not be able to reflect the multidimensional nature of the outcome. Therefore, the GOSE was used as a reference for further sensitivity analyses on more specific outcome scales, addressing further potential deficits following TBI. The physical component summary score (PCS) of the generic health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments (SF-36v2/-12v2) and the TBI-specific HRQOL instruments (QOLIBRI/-OS) were most sensitive in distinguishing recovery after TBI across all time points and patient groups, followed by the RPQ assessing post-concussion symptoms and the PHQ-9 measuring depression. The SF-36v2/-12v2 mental component summary score and the GAD-7 measuring anxiety were less sensitive in several group comparisons. The assessment of the functional recovery status combined with generic HRQOL (the PCS of the SF-12v2), disease-specific HRQOL (QOLIBRI-OS), and post-concussion symptoms (RPQ) can provide a sensitive, comprehensive, yet time-efficient evaluation of the health status of individuals after TBI in different patient groups. Show less
Steinbuechel, N. von; Rauen, K.; Krenz, U.; Wu, Y.J.; Covic, A.; Plass, A.M.; ... ; Linguistic Validation Grp CENTER 2021
Assessing outcomes in multinational studies on traumatic brain injury (TBI) poses major challenges and requires relevant instruments in languages other than English. Of the 19 outcome instruments... Show moreAssessing outcomes in multinational studies on traumatic brain injury (TBI) poses major challenges and requires relevant instruments in languages other than English. Of the 19 outcome instruments selected for use in the observational Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI (CENTER-TBI) study, 17 measures lacked translations in at least one target language. To fill this gap, we aimed to develop well-translated linguistically and psychometrically validated instruments. We performed translations and linguistic validations of patient-reported measures (PROMs), clinician-reported (ClinRO), and performance-based (PerfO) outcome instruments, using forward and backward translations, reconciliations, cognitive debriefings with up to 10 participants, iterative revisions, and international harmonization with input from over 150 international collaborators. In total, 237 translations and 211 linguistic validations were carried out in up to 20 languages. Translations were evaluated at the linguistic and cultural level by coding changes when the original versions are compared with subsequent translation steps, using the output of cognitive debriefings, and using comprehension rates. The average comprehension rate per instrument varied from 88% to 98%, indicating a good quality of the translations. These outcome instruments provide a solid basis for future TBI research and clinical practice and allow the aggregation and analysis of data across different countries and languages. Show less
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) may lead to impairments in various outcome domains. Since most instruments assessing these are only available in a limited number of languages, psychometrically... Show moreTraumatic brain injury (TBI) may lead to impairments in various outcome domains. Since most instruments assessing these are only available in a limited number of languages, psychometrically validated translations are important for research and clinical practice. Thus, our aim was to investigate the psychometric properties of the patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) applied in the CENTER-TBI study. The study sample comprised individuals who filled in the six-months assessments (GAD-7, PHQ-9, PCL-5, RPQ, QOLIBRI/-OS, SF-36v2/-12v2). Classical psychometric characteristics were investigated and compared with those of the original English versions. The reliability was satisfactory to excellent; the instruments were comparable to each other and to the original versions. Validity analyses demonstrated medium to high correlations with well-established measures. The original factor structure was replicated by all the translations, except for the RPQ, SF-36v2/-12v2 and some language samples for the PCL-5, most probably due to the factor structure of the original instruments. The translation of one to two items of the PHQ-9, RPQ, PCL-5, and QOLIBRI in three languages could be improved in the future to enhance scoring and application at the individual level. Researchers and clinicians now have access to reliable and valid instruments to improve outcome assessment after TBI in national and international health care. Show less
