The Journal of the Korea Contents Association (한국콘텐츠학회논문지)

The Korea Contents Association (한국콘텐츠학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Assessment Tools of Cognitive-communicative Ability for Traumatic Brain Injury and Right Hemisphere Damage: A Review

외상성 뇌손상 및 우반구 손상 환자의 인지-의사소통 능력 평가도구에 관한 문헌 고찰

  • 이미숙 (연세대학교 대학원 언어병리학협동과정) ;
  • 김향희 (연세대학교 의과대학 재활의학교실 및 재활의학연구소)
  • Received : 2010.11.05
  • Accepted : 2011.03.21
  • Published : 2011.04.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Cognitive-communicative disorders after traumatic brain injury(TBI) and right hemisphere damage(RHD) are different from other neurological disorders in nature. Therefore, it is not desirable to use aphasia tests in evaluating individuals with TBI or RHD. The aim of this study is to review assessment protocols on TBI and RHD, and literature related with them. As a result, it is recommended that individuals with TBI be examined in scope of the cognition including attention, memory, organization, reasoning, as well as the functional communication. Similarly, it is useful to consider high-order language related to various cognitive domains in assessing cognitive-communicative ability after RHD. In conclusion, we need to focus on the overall cognitive-communicative domains in an evaluative process of TBI and RHD. Furthermore, it is necessary to develop multiple items for individuals with cognitivecommunicative disorders for the purpose of differentiating these heterogeneous groups from other neurological disorders such as aphasia, and of making good use of them as a therapeutic manual.

외상성 뇌손상 및 우반구 손상 환자의 인지-의사소통 능력은 다른 신경학적 장애군과 다른 양상을 띤다. 따라서, 이들의 진단 시 실어증 평가도구 등을 활용하는 것은 바람직하지 않다. 본 연구에서는 두 장애군의 인지-의사소통 능력을 평가할 수 있는 문항을 개발하기에 앞서, 이와 관련된 국외 문헌 및 평가도구를 살펴보고자 하였다. 연구 결과, 외상성 뇌손상 환자의 평가 시에는 주의력, 기억력, 조직화 능력, 추론력, 기능적 의사소통 능력 등을 포괄적으로 고려하는 것이 유용함을 알 수 있었다. 또한, 우반구 손상 이후에는 주의력 등 여러 인지 영역과 함께 고차원적 언어 능력을 평가할 필요성이 제기되었다. 요컨대, 두 장애군의 인지-의사소통 능력을 평가하기 위해서는 다양한 인지-의사소통 영역 간의 영향을 반드시 고려해야 한다. 아울러, 두 장애군을 실어증 등 다른 신경학적 장애군으로부터 변별하고, 치료 시 영역별 지침서로서 활용할 수 있는 평가도구의 개발이 필요하다.

Keywords

References

  1. B. E. Murdoch and D. G. Theodoros, Traumatic brain injury: associated speech, language and swallowing disorders, Singular Thomson Learning, 2001.
  2. V. Anderson, "Outcome from mild head injury in young children: a prospective study," J. of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, Vol.23, No.6, pp.705-717, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1076/jcen.23.6.705.1015
  3. S. Borgaro, "Cognitive and affective sequelae in complicated and uncomplicated mild traumatic brain injury," Brain Injury, Vol.17, No.3, pp.189-198, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1080/0269905021000013183
  4. G. Hanten, "Childhood head injury and metacognitive processes in language and memory," Developmental Neuropsychology, Vol.25, No.1/2, pp.85-106, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326942dn2501&2_6
  5. M. Ylvisaker, Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation: Children and Adolescents (2nd ed.), Butterworth-Heinemann, 1998.
  6. F. J. Hinchliffe, B. E. Murdoch, and H. J. Chenery, "Towards a conceptualisation of language and cognitive impairment in closed head injury: use of clinical measures," Brain Injury, Vol.12, pp.109-132, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1080/026990598122746
  7. B. M. Whelan, B. E. Murdoch, and N. Bellamy, "Delineating Communication Impairments Associated With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Case Report," J. of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, Vol.22, No.3, pp.192-197, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.HTR.0000271120.04405.db
  8. F. J. Hinchliffe, "Cognitive-linguistic subgroups in closed head injury," Brain Injury, Vol.12, pp.369-398, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1080/026990598122502
  9. V. Abusamra, "Communication Impairments in Patients with Right Hemisphere Damage," Life Span and Disability, Vol.XII, No.1, pp.67-82. 2009.
  10. M. D. Pell, "Fundamental frequency encoding of linguistic and emotional prosody by right-hemisphere-damaged speakers," Brain and Language, Vol.69, No.2, pp.161-192, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2065
  11. J. P. Walker and T. Daigle, "Hemispheric specialization in processing prosodic structures: Revisited," Brain and Language, Vol.36, pp.580-591, 2000.
  12. P. S. Myers, "Toward a definition of RHD syndrome," Aphasiology, Vol.15, pp.913-918, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687040143000285
  13. V. Abusamra, Perspectiva pragmatica en la evaluacion de los lesionados derechos, Facultad de Psicologia, 2004.
  14. D. G. Ross-Swain, Ross Information Processing Assessment, PRO-ED, 1996.
  15. B. B. Adamovich and J. Henderson, Scales of Cognitive Ability for Traumatic Brain Injury, Pro-Ed., 1992.
  16. M. M. Sohlberg, Attention Process Training-2 Test (2nd ed.), Lash & Associates, 2001.
  17. N. Helm-Estabrooks and G. Hotz, Brief Test of Head Injury, The Riverside Publishing Company, 1990.
  18. C. Randolph, Repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status(RBANS), Psychological Corporation, 1998.
  19. E. H. Wiig and W. Secord, Test of Language Competence-Expanded Edition, Psychological Corporation, 1989.
  20. A. L. Holland, C. Frattali, and D. Fromm, Communication Activities of Daily Living-2, Pro-Ed., 1999.
  21. C. Frattali, American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Functional Assessment of Communication Skills for Adults, ASHA, 1995.
  22. L. L. Murray, "Attention and aphasia: Theory, research and clinical implications," Aphasiology, Vol.13, pp.91-112, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1080/026870399402226
  23. R. J. Gillis, J. N. Pierce, and M. McHenry, Traumatic brain injury rehabilitation for speech-language pathologists, Butterworth-Heinemann, 1996.
  24. L. L. Hartley, Cognitive-communicative abilities following brain injury: A functional approach, Singular Publishing Group, 1995.
  25. J. A. Waltz, "A system for relational reasoning in human prefrontal cortex," Psychological Science, Vol.10, pp.119-125, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00118
  26. B. S. Fogel, Cognitive dysfunction and the need for longterm care: Implications for public policy, American Association of Retired Persons, 1994.
  27. S. Mcdonald, L. Togher, and C. Code, Communication Disorders Following Traumatic Brain Injury, Psychology Press, 1999.
  28. M. G. Giles and J. Clark-Wilson, Brain injury rehabilitation: A neurofunctional approach, Chapman & Hall. 1993.
  29. M. M. Sohlberg and C. A. Mateer, Cognitive rehabilitation: An integrative neuropsychological approach, The Guilford Press, 2001.
  30. D. Beukelma and K. Yorkston, Communication disorders following traumatic brain injury: Management of cognitive, language, and motor impairments, Pro-Ed., 1991.
  31. R. L. Towne and L. M. Entwisle, "Metaphoric comprehension in adolescents with traumatic brian injury and in adolescents with language learning disability," Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, Vol.24, pp.100-107, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461.2402.100
  32. P. Pimental and J. Knight, Mini-Inventory of Right Brain Injury-2. Pro-Ed., 2000.
  33. K. Bryan, The Right Hemisphere Language Battery, Whurr, 1995.
  34. H. Gardner and H. H. Brownell, Right Hemisphere Communication Battery, VAMC, 1986.
  35. M. S. Hough, S. DeMarco, and A. B. Schmitzer, Episodes of word retrieval failures after right hemisphere brain-damage, Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, MA, 1997.
  36. K. L. Burrell, C. W. Linebaugh, and C. Cozens-Hoffman, "The effects of auditory distractors on the auditory and reading comprehension of adults with unilateral right hemisphere damage," Clinical Aphasiology, Vol.24, pp.255-270, 1996.
  37. L. L. Murray, "The Effects of Varying Attentional Demands on the Word Retrieval Skills of Adults with Aphasia, Right Hemisphere Brain Damage, or No Brain Damage," Brain and Language, Vol.72, pp.40-72, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2281
  38. L. Gagnon, "Processing of metaphoric and non-metaphoric alternative meanings of words after right and left hemisphere lesion," Brian and Language, Vol.87, pp.217-226, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00057-9
  39. R. H. Brookshire, Clinical Aphasiology: Conference Proceedings, BRK Publishers, 1981.
  40. A. M. Bihrle, "Comprehension of humorous and nonhumorous materials by left and right brain-damaged patients," Brain and Cognition, Vol.5, pp.399-412, 1986. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2626(86)90042-4
  41. E. Benton and K. Bryan, "Right cerebral hemisphere damage: Incidence of language problems," International J. of Rehabilitation Research, Vol.19, pp.47-54, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004356-199603000-00005
  42. H. H. Brownel and Y. Joanette, Discourse ability and brain damage: Theoretical and empirical perspectives, Springer-Verlag, 1990.
  43. E. Lojek-Osiejuk, "Knowledge of scripts reflected in discourse of aphasics and right-brain-damaged patients," Brain and Language, Vol.53, pp.58-80, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1996.0037
  44. G. A. Davis, T. M. O´Neil-Pirozzi, and M. Coon, "Referential cohesion and logical coherence of narration after right hemisphere stroke," Brain and Language, Vol.56, No.2, pp.183-210, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1997.1741
  45. V. Abusamra, A. Y. Miranda, and A. Ferreres, "Evaluacion de la iniciacion einhibicion verbal en espanol. Adaptacion y normas del test de Hayling," Revista Argentina de Neuropsicologia, Vol.9, pp.19-32, 2007.
  46. B. Stemmer, F. Giroux, and Y. Joanette, "Production and evaluation of requests by right hemisphere brain-damaged individuals," Brain and Language, Vol.47, pp.1-31, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1994.1040
  47. L. S. Turkstra, C. Coelho, and M. Ylvisaker, "The Use of Standardized Tests for Individuals with Cognitive-Communication Disorders," Seminars in Speech and Language, Vol.26, No.4, pp.216-222, 2005.

Cited by

  1. Development and application of cognitive-pragmatic language ability assessment protocol for traumatic brain injury vol.23, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2016.1178644