Pilot validation study of a screening tool used with ABI patients

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    A pilot validation study to establish the effectiveness of a screening tool used to identify subtle cognitive and occupational performance problems in a sample of acquired brain injury patients admitted to a neurological hospital in the UK

  • IRAS ID

    191807

  • Contact name

    Suzanne Simpson

  • Contact email

    suzanne.simpson@go.edgehill.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Edge Hill University

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    0 years, 8 months, 30 days

  • Research summary

    An acquired brain injury (ABI) is described as an injury to the brain that has occurred since birth. Causes can include trauma due to a fall or road traffic accident, a stroke, tumour or infection. This can result in changes to thinking skills, physical skills, emotion or behaviour leading to a change in function and can be temporary or permanent (Headway, 2013). Occupational therapy is the use of assessment and treatment to develop, recover, or maintain the daily living and work skills of people with a physical, mental, or cognitive disorder. Sometimes after an ABI patients can experience thinking skills problems that are so subtle they can not easily be identified by staff and it is not until these patients get home that they start to experience difficulties. This study aims to explore the use of a new screening tool known as the Cognitive Functional Performance Measure or CFPM. This is a paper based screening assessment tool used to identify the subtle thinking skills problems often experienced after brain injury and indicates the need to trigger an occupational therapy referral. The CFPM will be compared with two existing assessment tools the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Kettle Test. These tools have been used and shown validity in the assessment and treatment of patients with brain injury. There will be two groups of patients those that are found to have thinking skills problems on the CFPM and those that do not. Both groups will then be tested using the MoCA and Kettle Test and all the scores compared.

  • REC name

    North West - Liverpool Central Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    16/NW/0182

  • Date of REC Opinion

    15 Apr 2016

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion