Cargando…
The Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST): Tool development, factor structure and validity
Currently health care pathways (the combination and order of services that a patient receives to manage their injury) following a mild traumatic brain injury vary considerably. Some clinicians lack confidence in injury recognition, management and knowing when to refer. A clinical expert group develo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7861451/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33539482 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246512 |
_version_ | 1783647091279527936 |
---|---|
author | Theadom, Alice Hardaker, Natalie Bray, Charlotte Siegert, Richard Henshall, Kevin Forch, Katherine Fernando, Kris King, Doug Fulcher, Mark Jewell, Sam Shaikh, Nusratnaaz Bastos Gottgtroy, Renata Hume, Patria |
author_facet | Theadom, Alice Hardaker, Natalie Bray, Charlotte Siegert, Richard Henshall, Kevin Forch, Katherine Fernando, Kris King, Doug Fulcher, Mark Jewell, Sam Shaikh, Nusratnaaz Bastos Gottgtroy, Renata Hume, Patria |
author_sort | Theadom, Alice |
collection | PubMed |
description | Currently health care pathways (the combination and order of services that a patient receives to manage their injury) following a mild traumatic brain injury vary considerably. Some clinicians lack confidence in injury recognition, management and knowing when to refer. A clinical expert group developed the Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST) to provide guidance on health care pathways based on clinical indicators of poor recovery. The tool aims to facilitate access to specialist services (if required) to improve longer term prognosis. The tool was developed using a three-step process including: 1) domain mapping; 2) item development and 3) item testing and review. An online retrospective survey of 114 adults (>16 years) who had experienced a mild brain injury in the past 10 years was used to determine the initial psychometric properties of the 15-item symptom scale of the BIST. Participants were randomised to complete the BIST and one of two existing symptom scales; the Rivermead Post-concussion Symptom Questionnaire (RPQ) or the Sports Concussion Assessment Test (SCAT-5) symptom scale to determine concurrent validity. Participant responses to the BIST symptom scale items were used to determine scale reliability using Cronbach’s alpha. A principal components analysis explored the underlying factor structure. Spearman’s correlation coefficients determined concurrent validity with the RPQ and SCAT-5 symptom scales. The 15 items were found to require a reading age of 6–8 years old using readability statistics. High concurrent validity was shown against the RPQ (r = 0.91) and SCAT-5 (r = 0.90). The BIST total symptom scale (α = 0.94) and the three factors identified demonstrated excellent internal consistency: physical/emotional (α = 0.90), cognitive (α = 0.92) and vestibular-ocular (α = 0.80). This study provides evidence to support the utility, internal consistency, factor structure and concurrent validity of the BIST. Further research is warranted to determine the utility of the BIST scoring criteria and responsiveness to change in patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7861451 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78614512021-02-12 The Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST): Tool development, factor structure and validity Theadom, Alice Hardaker, Natalie Bray, Charlotte Siegert, Richard Henshall, Kevin Forch, Katherine Fernando, Kris King, Doug Fulcher, Mark Jewell, Sam Shaikh, Nusratnaaz Bastos Gottgtroy, Renata Hume, Patria PLoS One Research Article Currently health care pathways (the combination and order of services that a patient receives to manage their injury) following a mild traumatic brain injury vary considerably. Some clinicians lack confidence in injury recognition, management and knowing when to refer. A clinical expert group developed the Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST) to provide guidance on health care pathways based on clinical indicators of poor recovery. The tool aims to facilitate access to specialist services (if required) to improve longer term prognosis. The tool was developed using a three-step process including: 1) domain mapping; 2) item development and 3) item testing and review. An online retrospective survey of 114 adults (>16 years) who had experienced a mild brain injury in the past 10 years was used to determine the initial psychometric properties of the 15-item symptom scale of the BIST. Participants were randomised to complete the BIST and one of two existing symptom scales; the Rivermead Post-concussion Symptom Questionnaire (RPQ) or the Sports Concussion Assessment Test (SCAT-5) symptom scale to determine concurrent validity. Participant responses to the BIST symptom scale items were used to determine scale reliability using Cronbach’s alpha. A principal components analysis explored the underlying factor structure. Spearman’s correlation coefficients determined concurrent validity with the RPQ and SCAT-5 symptom scales. The 15 items were found to require a reading age of 6–8 years old using readability statistics. High concurrent validity was shown against the RPQ (r = 0.91) and SCAT-5 (r = 0.90). The BIST total symptom scale (α = 0.94) and the three factors identified demonstrated excellent internal consistency: physical/emotional (α = 0.90), cognitive (α = 0.92) and vestibular-ocular (α = 0.80). This study provides evidence to support the utility, internal consistency, factor structure and concurrent validity of the BIST. Further research is warranted to determine the utility of the BIST scoring criteria and responsiveness to change in patients. Public Library of Science 2021-02-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7861451/ /pubmed/33539482 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246512 Text en © 2021 Theadom et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Theadom, Alice Hardaker, Natalie Bray, Charlotte Siegert, Richard Henshall, Kevin Forch, Katherine Fernando, Kris King, Doug Fulcher, Mark Jewell, Sam Shaikh, Nusratnaaz Bastos Gottgtroy, Renata Hume, Patria The Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST): Tool development, factor structure and validity |
title | The Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST): Tool development, factor structure and validity |
title_full | The Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST): Tool development, factor structure and validity |
title_fullStr | The Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST): Tool development, factor structure and validity |
title_full_unstemmed | The Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST): Tool development, factor structure and validity |
title_short | The Brain Injury Screening Tool (BIST): Tool development, factor structure and validity |
title_sort | brain injury screening tool (bist): tool development, factor structure and validity |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7861451/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33539482 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246512 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT theadomalice thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT hardakernatalie thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT braycharlotte thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT siegertrichard thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT henshallkevin thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT forchkatherine thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT fernandokris thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT kingdoug thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT fulchermark thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT jewellsam thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT shaikhnusratnaaz thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT bastosgottgtroyrenata thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT humepatria thebraininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT theadomalice braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT hardakernatalie braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT braycharlotte braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT siegertrichard braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT henshallkevin braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT forchkatherine braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT fernandokris braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT kingdoug braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT fulchermark braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT jewellsam braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT shaikhnusratnaaz braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT bastosgottgtroyrenata braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity AT humepatria braininjuryscreeningtoolbisttooldevelopmentfactorstructureandvalidity |