Measuring the social interactions of people with traumatic brain injury and their communication partners: The adapted Kagan scales

Background: Considerable attention has been given to the nature of communication impairments of individuals with TBI (Coelho, 2007; Ylvisaker, Turkstra, & Coelho, 2005). However, there have been few data focusing on the way communication partners deal with the often distressing sequelae of TBI. Aims: This study reports inter- and intra-rater reliability of the Adapted Measure of Support in Conversation (MSC) and Measure of Participation in Conversation (MPC) for TBI interactions. Method & Procedures: The MSC and MPC were adapted to reflect theoretical models of cognitive-communication support for people with TBI. A total of 10 casual and 10 purposeful TBI interactions were independently rated by two raters to establish inter-rater reliability and by one rater on two separate occasions to determine intra-rater reliability. Outcomes & Results: Excellent inter-rater agreement was established on the MSC (ICC = 0.85–0.97) and the MPC (ICC = 0.84–0.89). Intra-rater agreement was also strong (MSC: ICC = 0.80–0.90; MPC: ICC = 0.81–0.92). Over 90% of all ratings scored within 0.5 on a 9-point scale. Conclusions: This is the first scale to measure the communication partner during TBI interactions. It shows promise in evaluating communication partner training programmes.

[1]  Nenad Kostanjsek,et al.  Ageing, Disability and the WHO's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) , 2003 .

[2]  L. Togher,et al.  Measuring service encounters with the traumatic brain injury population , 1997 .

[3]  P. Square,et al.  A Set of Observational Measures for Rating Support and Participation in Conversation Between Adults with Aphasia and Their Conversation Partners , 2004, Topics in stroke rehabilitation.

[4]  恵子 紀国谷 国際生活機能分類(International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF)にみた福祉・保健・医療の専門職協働における連携に関する貢献と課題 , 2007 .

[5]  C. Prutting,et al.  A clinical appraisal of the pragmatic aspects of language. , 1987, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[6]  M. Ylvisaker,et al.  Nonstandardized assessment approaches for individuals with traumatic brain injuries. , 2005, Seminars in speech and language.

[7]  D. Cicchetti Guidelines, Criteria, and Rules of Thumb for Evaluating Normed and Standardized Assessment Instruments in Psychology. , 1994 .

[8]  E. Montgomery,et al.  Analysing Conversational Discourse After Traumatic Brain Injury: Isn't It About Time? , 2006, Brain Impairment.

[9]  F. Bond,et al.  Conversation with traumatically brain-injured individuals: a controlled study of behavioural changes and their impact. , 1997, Brain injury.

[10]  L. Togher,et al.  Analysing discourse in the traumatic brain injury population: telephone interactions with different communication partners. , 1997, Brain injury.

[11]  L. Togher,et al.  A new perspective on the relationship between communication impairment and disempowerment following head injury in information exchanges. , 1996, Disability and rehabilitation.

[12]  Sandra E. Black,et al.  Training volunteers as conversation partners using "Supported Conversation for Adults with Aphasia" (SCA): a controlled trial. , 2001, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[13]  P. Snow,et al.  Measuring perception of communicative ability: the development and evaluation of the La Trobe communication questionnaire , 2000 .

[14]  R. Tate,et al.  Training Communication Partners of People With Traumatic Brain Injury: Reporting the Protocol for a Clinical Trial , 2009, Brain Impairment.

[15]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[16]  A. Hyder,et al.  The impact of traumatic brain injuries: a global perspective. , 2007, NeuroRehabilitation.

[17]  R. Knight,et al.  The Profile of Functional Impairment in Communication (PFIC): a measure of communication impairment for clinical use. , 1996, Brain injury.

[18]  A. Sander,et al.  Relation of executive functioning and social communication measures to functional outcomes following traumatic brain injury. , 2008, NeuroRehabilitation.

[19]  S. Walter,et al.  Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[20]  Lyn S Turkstra,et al.  Behavioral and social interventions for individuals with traumatic brain injury: a summary of the research with clinical implications. , 2005, Seminars in speech and language.

[21]  W. Hauser,et al.  The Epidemiology of Traumatic Brain Injury: A Review , 2003, Epilepsia.

[22]  M. Bellon,et al.  The effect of context on communication: A study of the language and communication skills of adults with acquired brain injury , 2006, Brain injury.

[23]  C. Coelho Management of discourse deficits following traumatic brain injury: progress, caveats, and needs. , 2007, Seminars in speech and language.

[24]  Charity Shelton,et al.  Effectiveness of communication/interaction strategies with patients who have neurological injuries in a rehabilitation setting , 2007, Brain injury.