David E Marra1,2, Kristin M Hamlet1, Russell M Bauer1,3,4, Dawn Bowers1,3. 1. Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. 2. McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. 3. Department of Neurology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. 4. Brain Rehabilitation Research Center, Malcolm Randall VAMC, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Abstract
Objective: Due to the recent COVID-19 pandemic, the field of neuropsychology must rapidly evolve to incorporate assessments delivered via telehealth, or teleneuropsychology (TNP). Given the increasing demand to deliver services electronically due to public health concerns, it is important to review available TNP validity studies. This systematic review builds upon the work of Brearly and colleagues' (2017) meta-analysis and provides an updated review of the literature, with special emphasis on test-level validity data.Method: Using similar methodology as Brearly and colleagues (2017) three internet databases (PubMed, EBSCOhost, PsycINFO) were searched for relevant articles published since 2016. Studies with older adults (aged 65+) who underwent face-to-face and TNP assessments in a counterbalanced cross-over design were included. After review, 10 articles were retained. Combined with nine articles from Brearly's analysis, a total of 19 studies were included in the systematic review. Results: Retained studies included samples from 5 different countries, various ethnic/cultural backgrounds, and diverse diagnostic populations. Test-level analysis suggests there are cognitive screeners (MMSE, MoCA), language tests (BNT, Letter Fluency), attention/working memory tasks (Digit Span Total), and memory tests (HVLT-R) with strong support for TNP validity. Other measures are promising but lack sufficient support at this time. Few TNP studies have done in-home assessments and most studies rely on a PC or laptop.Conclusions: Overall, there appears to be good support for TNP assessments in older adults. Challenges to TNP in the current climate are discussed. Finally, a provisional outline of viable TNP procedures used in our clinic is provided.
Objective: Due to the recent COVID-19 pandemic, the field of neuropsychology must rapidly evolve to incorporate assessments delivered via telehealth, or teleneuropsychology (TNP). Given the increasing demand to deliver services electronically due to public health concerns, it is important to review available TNP validity studies. This systematic review builds upon the work of Brearly and colleagues' (2017) meta-analysis and provides an updated review of the literature, with special emphasis on test-level validity data.Method: Using similar methodology as Brearly and colleagues (2017) three internet databases (PubMed, EBSCOhost, PsycINFO) were searched for relevant articles published since 2016. Studies with older adults (aged 65+) who underwent face-to-face and TNP assessments in a counterbalanced cross-over design were included. After review, 10 articles were retained. Combined with nine articles from Brearly's analysis, a total of 19 studies were included in the systematic review. Results: Retained studies included samples from 5 different countries, various ethnic/cultural backgrounds, and diverse diagnostic populations. Test-level analysis suggests there are cognitive screeners (MMSE, MoCA), language tests (BNT, Letter Fluency), attention/working memory tasks (Digit Span Total), and memory tests (HVLT-R) with strong support for TNP validity. Other measures are promising but lack sufficient support at this time. Few TNP studies have done in-home assessments and most studies rely on a PC or laptop.Conclusions: Overall, there appears to be good support for TNP assessments in older adults. Challenges to TNP in the current climate are discussed. Finally, a provisional outline of viable TNP procedures used in our clinic is provided.
Entities:
Keywords:
Telehealth; systematic review; teleneuropsychology; validity study
Authors: Timothy W Brearly; Robert D Shura; Sarah L Martindale; Rory A Lazowski; David D Luxton; Brian V Shenal; Jared A Rowland Journal: Neuropsychol Rev Date: 2017-06-16 Impact factor: 7.444
Authors: Lydia Bunker; Tammy T Hshieh; Bonnie Wong; Eva M Schmitt; Thomas Travison; Jacqueline Yee; Kerry Palihnich; Eran Metzger; Tamara G Fong; Sharon K Inouye Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2016-08-09 Impact factor: 3.485
Authors: Elizabeth L Ciemins; Barbara Holloway; Patricia Jay Coon; Thelma McClosky-Armstrong; Sung-Joon Min Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Petra Scheerbaum; Stephanie Book; Michael Jank; Etienne Hanslian; Melanie DellO'ro; Julia Schneider; Julia-Sophia Scheuermann; Sophia Bösl; Michael Jeitler; Christian Kessler; Elmar Graessel Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Dag Aarsland; Lucia Batzu; Glenda M Halliday; Gert J Geurtsen; Clive Ballard; K Ray Chaudhuri; Daniel Weintraub Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 52.329
Authors: Katherine L Zane; Nicholas S Thaler; Shannon E Reilly; James J Mahoney; David M Scarisbrick Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2020-12-28 Impact factor: 3.535
Authors: Joshua T Fox-Fuller; Julie Ngo; Celina F Pluim; Rini I Kaplan; Dong-Ho Kim; Juliana A U Anzai; Defne Yucebas; Soibifaa M Briggs; Paula A Aduen; Alice Cronin-Golomb; Yakeel T Quiroz Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2021-07-26 Impact factor: 3.535
Authors: Jessica Podda; Andrea Tacchino; Ludovico Pedullà; Margherita Monti Bragadin; Mario Alberto Battaglia; Giampaolo Brichetto Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2020-10-13 Impact factor: 5.855
Authors: Marcela Kitaigorodsky; David Loewenstein; Rosie Curiel Cid; Elizabeth Crocco; Katherine Gorman; Christian González-Jiménez Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2021-05-13
Authors: Lindsay D Nelson; Jason K Barber; Nancy R Temkin; Kristen Dams-O'Connor; Sureyya Dikmen; Joseph T Giacino; Mark D Kramer; Harvey S Levin; Michael A McCrea; John Whyte; Yelena G Bodien; John K Yue; Geoffrey T Manley Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2020-12-14 Impact factor: 5.269