Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T18:05:45.167Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Course of Post-Traumatic Amnesia: Three Little Words

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

M.L. Schwartz ,
F. Carruth ,
M.A. Binns ,
C. Brandys ,
R. Moulton ,
W.G. Snow  and
D.T. Stuss
M.L. Schwartz*
Affiliation:
Sunnybrook Health Science Centre, Toronto Department of Surgery (Neurosurgery), University of Toronto, Toronto
F. Carruth
Affiliation:
Sunnybrook Health Science Centre, Toronto
M.A. Binns
Affiliation:
Rotman Research Institute of Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care, Toronto
C. Brandys
Affiliation:
St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto
R. Moulton
Affiliation:
St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto Department of Surgery (Neurosurgery), University of Toronto, Toronto
W.G. Snow
Affiliation:
Sunnybrook Health Science Centre, Toronto
D.T. Stuss
Affiliation:
Rotman Research Institute of Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care, Toronto Department of Psychology and Medicine (Neurology), University of Toronto, Toronto
*
2075 Bay view Avenue, Suite A129, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4N 3M5
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

To provide a simple means of ”real time“ recognition of emergence from post-traumatic amnesia (PTA).

Methods:

Ninety-one patients with traumatic brain injury (PBI); 53 minor (GCS 13-15), 19 moderate (GCS 9-12), 18 severe (GCS 3-8). Twenty-seven control subjects treated at two regional trauma units for their acute phase and followed in a hospital-based research institute were studied prospectively. Subjects were examined repeatedly following injury with the Galveston Orientation and Amnesia Test (GOAT) and tests of their ability to learn and retain new information. Word triplets balanced for concreteness and frequency were presented. Immediate and 24-hour recall were tested. If 24-hour recall was imperfect, recognition was tested by presenting the 3 target words and 6 distracters. The target words were then re-presented and recall was tested the next day. The time intervals to first perfect recognition and first free perfect recall were compared with the patients' first GOAT score of 75 or greater on 2 successive days. Simple line drawings of common objects were also presented to the subjects using an identical paradigm. The outcome measures were GOAT, 3-word recognition and recall, 3 picture recognition and recall.

Results:

For all categories of head injury severity, the median interval to perfect free recall of words followed the achievement GOAT criterion by a significant interval. The mean GOAT scores for perfect 3-word recall and recognition corresponding to minor, moderate and severe injuries were 97, 90 and 88, and 97, 76 and 68 respectively. The recognition and recall of pictures preceded the recognition and recall of words by approximately 1 day.

Conclusions:

The orientation measures of the GOAT that contain material that the patient knew prior to injury obscure the determination of recovery of continuous memory and should be tested separately. Three-word recall which is simpler to administer than the GOAT is a more reliable measure of emergence from PTA. For patients who are dysphasic or who do not share a common language with the examiner, 3-picture recognition and recall may substitute for word recognition and recall.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , February 1998 , pp. 108 - 116
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Neurological Sciences Federation 1998

References

REFERENCES

1.Miller, H. Mental after-effects of head injury. Proc Roy Soc Med 1966; 59: 257–261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Symonds, CP, Russell, WR. Accidental head injuries. Lancet 1943; 2: 7–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Gronwall, D, Wrightson, P. Duration of post-traumatic amnesia after mild head injury. J Clin Neuropsychol 1980; 2: 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Brooks, DN. Wechsler Memory Scale performance and its relationship to brain damage after severe closed head injury. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1976; 39: 593–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Levin, HS, O’Donnell, VM, Grossman, RG. Galveston Orientation and Amnesia Test. A practical scale to assess cognition after head injury. J Nerv Ment Dis 1979; 167: 675–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Levin, HS, High, WM, Eisenberg, HM. Learning and forgetting during post-traumatic amnesia in head injured patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1988; 51: 14–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Fortuny, LAI, Briggs, M, Newcombe, F, Ratcliff, G, Thomas, C. Measuring the duration of post traumatic amnesia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1980; 43(5): 377–379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Shores, EA, Marossezeky, JE, Sandanam, J, Batchelor, J. Preliminary validation of a clinical scale for measuring the duration of posttraumatic amnesia. Med J Aust 1986; 144: 569–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.American Psychological Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. (Revised 3rd Edition). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1987.Google Scholar
10.Teasdale, G, Jennett, B. Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness: a practical scale. Lancet 1974; 2: 81–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Jennett, J, Snoek, J, Bond, MR, Brooks, N. Disability after severe head injury: observations on the use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1981; 44: 285–293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Baker, SP. The Injury Severity Score: an update. J Trauma 1976; 16: 822–885.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Baker, SP, O’Neill, B, Haddon, W, Long, WB. The Injury Severity Score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care. J Trauma 1974; 14: 187–196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Kondziolka, D, Schwartz, ML, Walters, BC, Mcneill, I. The Sunnybrook Neurotrauma Assessment Record: improving trauma data collection. J Trauma 1989; 29(6): 730–735.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Marshall, LF, Marshall, SB, Klauber, MR, et al. A new classification of head injury based on computerized tomography. J Neurosurg 1991; 75: S14-S20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Paivio, A, Yuille, JC, Madigan, SA. Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. J Exp Psych, Monograph Supplement 1968; 76(1, part 2).Google ScholarPubMed
17.Snodgrass, JG, Vanderwart, M. A standardized set of 260 pictures: norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. J Exp Psychol: Human Learning and Memory 1980; 6: 174–215.Google ScholarPubMed
18.Lawless, JF. Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data. New York: Wiley & Sons, 1982.Google Scholar
19.Davidoff, G, Doljanac, R, Berent, S, et al. Galveston Orientation and Amnesia Test: its utility in the determination of closed head injury in acute spinal cord injury patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1989; 69: 432–434.Google Scholar