The effect of character and array type on visual spatial search quality following traumatic brain injury.

Disorders of visuomotor function are common following traumatic brain injury (TBI), but spatially directed visual attention has received little study in this population. 'Cancellation' testing is a common bedside method for assessing directed attention, which can provide information on how task properties influence visual scanning and search following severe TBI. Groups of 20 individuals after severe TBI and 21 healthy control subjects were matched for age and education. Participants performed finger tapping tests to assess motor speed as well as four cancellation tests employing letter and geometric figure stimuli in random and structured arrays. Control and TBI groups differed significantly on measures of accuracy, task completion time, and search quality. There was no significant effect of stimulus or array type on accuracy or time. Figure targets in a higher search quality, suggesting a right hemispheric dominance effect on these tasks. The findings support a deficit in visuomotor scanning performance in TBI beyond a purely motor effect. Interactions between stimulus and array types suggest that hemispheric cooperation is required for the optimal performance of these tasks, and that interhemispheric communication may be preferentially compromised by TBI.

[1]  K. Heilman,et al.  Right hemisphere dominance for attention , 1980, Neurology.

[2]  D. H. Williams,et al.  Sustained attention and information processing speed in chronic survivors of severe closed head injury. , 1988, Scandinavian journal of rehabilitation medicine. Supplement.

[3]  M. Albert A simple test of visual neglect , 1973, Neurology.

[4]  G. Zappala,et al.  Visual neglect in Parkinson's disease. , 1983, Archives of neurology.

[5]  S. Dimond Performance by Split-Brain Humans on Lateralized Vigilance Tasks , 1979, Cortex.

[6]  David Shum,et al.  Construct validity of eight tests of attention : comparison of normal and closed head injured samples , 1990 .

[7]  F. J. Friedrich,et al.  Effects of parietal injury on covert orienting of attention , 1984, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[8]  J. Ponsford,et al.  Evaluation of a remedial programme for attentional deficits following closed-head injury. , 1988, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[9]  D. Stuss,et al.  Reaction time after head injury: fatigue, divided and focused attention, and consistency of performance. , 1989, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[10]  Roger Whitehead,et al.  Right Hemisphere Processing Superiority During Sustained Visual Attention , 1991, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[11]  K. Heilman,et al.  Neglect and Related Disorders , 1984, Seminars in neurology.

[12]  K. Heilman,et al.  Spatial performance bias in normal elderly subjects on a letter cancellation task , 1994 .

[13]  E C Hills,et al.  Effect of stimulus number, target-to-distractor ratio, and motor speed on visual spatial search quality following traumatic brain injury. , 1997, Brain injury.

[14]  N. Zasler,et al.  Neuropharmacologic Management of Hemi-inattention After Brain Injury , 1991 .

[15]  N. Foldi,et al.  Selective attention skills in Alzheimer's disease: performance on graded cancellation tests varying in density and complexity. , 1992, Journal of gerontology.

[16]  D. Geldmacher Effects of Stimulus Number and Target-to-Distractor Ratio on the Performance of Random Array Letter Cancellation Tasks , 1996, Brain and Cognition.

[17]  M. Mesulam,et al.  Right cerebral dominance in spatial attention. Further evidence based on ipsilateral neglect. , 1987, Archives of neurology.