This chapter highlights studies that examined outcomes related to alterations in neurocognition. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) can result in changes in neurocognitive performance as measured by tests of sensory integrity, motor speed and coordination, attention, working memory, episodic memory, processing speed, language processing, visual-spatial processing, and executive functions (such as higher-order planning, initiating and directing, monitoring, problem-solving, and inhibitory control). Findings of alterations in neurocognitive performance were carefully examined by the committee; there were over 430 studies of TBI and neurocognitive outcomes in the committee’s database. The committee chose studies that specifically answered the question related to its charge, that is, what long-term outcomes (lasting longer than 6 months) might be associated with a penetrating or closed head injury in adults and meet the general criteria for inclusion described in Chapter 4. The term neurocognitive outcome as used in this chapter refers to cognitive impairment while the word neuropsychologic refers to the kinds of measurements most studies utilized to determine the level of impairment.
With regard to penetrating brain injury, it has been determined that the location of a brain injury and the volume of brain tissue lost affect the type and extent of neurocognitive deficits. Many scholarly articles and textbook chapters have described the relationship of localization of brain injury with specific outcomes (Damasio et al., 1994; Haas, 2001; Ratiu et al., 2004; Silver et al., 2005; Raymont et al., 2008), so it will not be discussed here.
The chapter first discusses outcomes related to penetrating head injury and then outcomes related to closed head injury. Conclusions follow each section; the conclusions that follow the closed head injury section are further delineated by the severity of the injury.
Studies of penetrating brain injuries have been conducted primarily in military populations and are useful because they have long-term followup and preinjury neurocognitive-test information. Primary studies are presented first, followed by secondary studies, a summary and conclusion, and finally a table (Table 6.1) with information abstracted from the primary studies.
Chapter 5 provides a detailed overview of many of the studies of military populations who have been injured during war. Some of the studies inform the discussion of long-term outcomes; others were not designed to answer the question posed to the committee regarding long-term sequelae of brain injury. The committee included the military studies that fit its task best; some of the studies are primary and others secondary, but they are all described in Chapter 5. The committee identified five primary studies of penetrating brain injury, and they are discussed below.
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 173
6
NEUROCOGNITIVE OUTCOMES
This chapter highlights studies that examined outcomes related to alterations in
neurocognition. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) can result in changes in neurocognitive
performance as measured by tests of sensory integrity, motor speed and coordination, attention,
working memory, episodic memory, processing speed, language processing, visual-spatial
processing, and executive functions (such as higher-order planning, initiating and directing,
monitoring, problem-solving, and inhibitory control). Findings of alterations in neurocognitive
performance were carefully examined by the committee; there were over 430 studies of TBI and
neurocognitive outcomes in the committee’s database. The committee chose studies that
specifically answered the question related to its charge, that is, what long-term outcomes (lasting
longer than 6 months) might be associated with a penetrating or closed head injury in adults and
meet the general criteria for inclusion described in Chapter 4. The term neurocognitive outcome
as used in this chapter refers to cognitive impairment while the word neuropsychologic refers to
the kinds of measurements most studies utilized to determine the level of impairment.
With regard to penetrating brain injury, it has been determined that the location of a brain
injury and the volume of brain tissue lost affect the type and extent of neurocognitive deficits.
Many scholarly articles and textbook chapters have described the relationship of localization of
brain injury with specific outcomes (Damasio et al., 1994; Haas, 2001; Ratiu et al., 2004; Silver
et al., 2005; Raymont et al., 2008), so it will not be discussed here.
The chapter first discusses outcomes related to penetrating head injury and then outcomes
related to closed head injury. Conclusions follow each section; the conclusions that follow the
closed head injury section are further delineated by the severity of the injury.
PENETRATING BRAIN INJURY
Studies of penetrating brain injuries have been conducted primarily in military
populations and are useful because they have long-term followup and preinjury neurocognitive-
test information. Primary studies are presented first, followed by secondary studies, a summary
and conclusion, and finally a table (Table 6.1) with information abstracted from the primary
studies.
Chapter 5 provides a detailed overview of many of the studies of military populations
who have been injured during war. Some of the studies inform the discussion of long-term
outcomes; others were not designed to answer the question posed to the committee regarding
long-term sequelae of brain injury. The committee included the military studies that fit its task
best; some of the studies are primary and others secondary, but they are all described in Chapter
5. The committee identified five primary studies of penetrating brain injury, and they are
discussed below.
173
OCR for page 173
174 GULF WAR AND HEALTH
Primary Studies
Teuber and Weinstein (1954) (see cohort description in Chapter 5) studied 35 World War
II veterans selected from 185 veterans who had penetrating missile injuries and loss of brain
tissue and 12 controls from 101 veterans who had missile injuries of peripheral nerves but no
brain injury. All veterans had sustained their injuries 5–8 years before the study. The 35 brain-
injured were selected by identifying equal numbers of men with injuries in the anterior or
posterior one-third of the brain and in the right or left hemisphere. The control group consisted of
nine men with arm injuries and three with leg injuries. All the men were tested with the Seguin-
Goddard Formboard Test, which was administered with the men blindfolded first in its normal
position and then after a 180-degree rotation. Men with brain injuries took more time, made
more errors, and recalled fewer forms than the controls.
Another study by Weinstein and Teuber (1957b) examined two groups of men: 62 who
had loss of cerebral tissue due to penetrating head injury and 50 who had trauma of peripheral
nerves. Preinjury Army General Classification Test (AGCT) scores, which had been
administered on induction into the Army 13–15 years before the study, were available for all the
men. Preinjury education level was determined by interview and from case records. The civilian
edition of the AGCT was administered to all the study participants 10–12 years after their
injuries. The findings indicate clearly that the change in AGCT score was significantly worse in
the penetrating-injury group than in the peripheral-nerve–injured group. Furthermore, although
the primary aim of the study was to investigate the connection between preinjury education and
intelligence and intellectual deterioration after brain injury, the authors note that the findings
were independent of any effects of differences in preinjury education or preinjury AGCT score.
Corkin et al. (1989) conducted a 30-year longitudinal study of 84 World War II veterans
to determine the cognitive effects of penetrating head injury: 57 veterans who had penetrating
head injury and 27 veterans who had peripheral nerve injury who were matched with respect to
age and premorbid intelligence and education. The veterans were examined in the 1950s and in
the 1980s. The veterans selected were those who had been seen by Teuber and Weinstein in New
York (see Chapter 5 for Teuber’s cohort of World War II veterans). Both groups of veterans had
received an average of 12 years of education before injury and were tested with the AGCT
before injury. Total scores of 42 veterans were available from military records. Review of the
preinjury AGCT total scores showed no differences between the two groups. Both groups were
given two cognitive tests after injury: the AGCT and the Hidden Figures Test. The AGCT
contains three subscales—vocabulary, arithmetic, and block-counting—and the Hidden Figures
Test measures the ability to discriminate figures from background. Ten years after the end of the
war, in the 1950s, the penetrating-injury group showed poorer performance on both cognitive
tests than the peripheral-nerve–injured controls. Forty years after the war, in the 1980s (when the
study was conducted), the penetrating-injury group exhibited even poorer performance on every
cognitive measure except vocabulary, which remained constant. When the data were examined
by brain region with computed tomography, the site of the injury exerted an even stronger effect.
Veterans with injuries of the left parietal lobe had a significantly greater decrease on the
vocabulary and arithmetic subscales, and those with lesions in other brain regions showed a
greater decrease on other subscales or on the Hidden Figures Tests. Penetrating-injury subjects
lost an average of 7.9 points from the 1950s to the 1980s, and those with peripheral nerve injury
gained an average of 0.4 point. The decline was most pronounced in older subjects. The results
suggested accelerated aging in those with penetrating head injury.
OCR for page 173
NEUROCOGNITIVE OUTCOMES 175
As part of the Vietnam Head Injury Study (VHIS; see Chapter 5 for description of the
study and the cohort), Grafman et al. (1988) studied the nature of intellectual function after
penetrating missile wounds. The cohort consisted of 263 men who had penetrating brain
injuries—96 with lesions in the right hemisphere, 78 in the left hemisphere, and 89 in both—and
64 uninjured controls who met the inclusion criteria: they served in Vietnam during the same
years as the brain-injured, and they were stratified according to preinjury Armed Forces
Qualification Test (AFQT) to be matched with the brain-injured. There were no significant
differences between the groups in age, education, or preinjury AFQT percentile scores. Although
Grafman and colleagues stratified head-injured subjects by location of brain injury, the study
data clearly indicate that the head-injured showed worse change than the controls in performance
on the AFQT. The authors also assessed whether brain-volume loss correlated with changes in
cognitive function. As expected, greater total brain-volume loss correlated with greater declines
in AFQT scores from before to after injury (p < 0.0001). The authors examined whether lesion
location was associated with cognitive decline. No significant effects on AFQT scores by lesion
location (right, left, or bilateral) were observed. Preinjury education level also did not correlate
with AFQT. The results indicated several factors that influence cognitive decline after brain
injury as measured with the AFQT: preinjury intelligence was the strongest predictor of
postinjury intelligence scores, followed by the size of the lesion, and then the location of the
lesion. Preinjury education level did not correlate with cognitive decline.
Raymont et al. (2008) examined 182 Vietnam veterans as part of phase 3 of the VHIS.
All were identified from the VHIS registry and had a history of penetrating head injury although
an additional 17 patients who were assessed for phase 3 had not participated in phase 1 or 2.
Controls were 32 veterans who had participated in phase 2 and an additional 23 who were
recruited through advertisements in veteran publications; none of the controls had a history of
head injury. All the veterans were assessed over 5–7 days at the National Naval Medical Center
in Bethesda, Maryland. There were no significant differences between cases and controls with
regard to age, years of education, or preinjury induction intelligence level (as measured with the
AFQT). Brain lesions were identified with computed tomography. The median AFQT score in
the entire sample was 65.0; in the penetrating-injury group, it was 54.0, and in the controls, 74.0.
The penetrating-injury veterans had a significantly greater decrease in AFQT score than controls
from phase 2 to phase 3 and from before injury to phase 3. The scores of the controls improved
from before injury to phase 2 compared to those with penetrating head injuries. If officers were
excluded from the sample, the AFQT scores of those with penetrating head injuries decreased
significantly more than the scores of the controls over the entire period from before injury to
phase 3. Those with penetrating injuries had lower AFQT scores at phase 3 (mean, 52.58) than
the controls (mean, 68.50). The authors examined several risk factors for AFQT outcome at
followup and for declining AFQT scores, including dementia, location of brain lesion, and
genetic markers. They found that preinjury intelligence was the most consistent predictor of
cognitive outcome at all followup times and of decline over time. There was no evidence that
laterality of the lesion affected overall intelligence or decline. Specific brain regions, the degree
of local and global atrophy, and some genetic markers were found to be associated with
exacerbated decline. Thus, the long-term followup of Vietnam veterans with penetrating head
injury found that exacerbated decline in intelligence is a significant risk.
OCR for page 173
176 GULF WAR AND HEALTH
Secondary Studies
Like the primary studies, the secondary studies of penetrating TBI have been conducted
in military cohorts (see Chapter 5), but they have methodologic limitations that prevented the
committee from including them as primary studies. For example, many of the studies examined
differences in specific cognitive domains as a function of the location of the brain injury or did
not compare brain-injured people with a non-brain-injured control group.
Weinstein and Teuber (1957a) examined the effects of penetrating brain injury on
intelligence-test scores in patients who had stable, localized brain injury. The investigators
obtained preinjury AGCT scores for 62 men who later sustained penetrating brain injury and for
50 controls who incurred arm or leg nerve injuries. All the men had been injured during World
War II 1–3 years after the initial AGCT. A comparable AGCT was administered about 10 years
after the men were injured. The preinjury scores of the brain-injured and control groups were
almost identical: means, 105.0 and 106.4, respectively. Scores on the postinjury test showed
some gain: 48 of the 50 controls increased their mean score to 119.4. The 62 brain-injured men
were divided into groups according to the location of their injuries: frontal, temporal, parietal, or
occipital, in the left, right, or both hemispheres. The investigators found that lesions in frontal
and occipital lobes were not associated with a significant decrease in scores, but lesions in the
parietal and temporal lobes of the left hemisphere were associated with a significant decrease.
Weinstein et al. (1956) studied spatial orientation in 62 men who had loss of cerebral
tissue because of penetrating head injury and 18 men who had leg peripheral nerve injuries. All
the men had been injured during World War II (see cohort description in Chapter 5). The authors
focused on a particular task of spatial orientation: finding a route on a map. Men with parietal
lobe lesions (in either hemisphere) did more poorly than all the brain-injured men who did not
have parietal lesions, and the men with brain damage, other than in the parietal lobe, did not
perform more poorly than controls.
The VHIS has resulted in numerous publications of long-term outcomes associated with
penetrating head injury (see Chapter 5). Salazar et al. (1986) found that Vietnam veterans who
had penetrating injuries of the basal forebrain had worse outcomes than uninjured controls with
regard to episodic memory, reasoning, and arithmetic but not on tests of intelligence, attention,
and language. Several studies by Grafman et al. (for example, 1986, 1990) provided evidence of
the detrimental effects of penetrating head injuries on facial discrimination (1986) and examined
neurocognitive performance on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, noting that brain-damaged
Vietnam veterans made more errors than controls (1990). Although there have been additional
studies in the VHIS series, many were not designed to answer the question specifically posed to
the committee regarding long-term health outcomes. The studies that do shed light on long-term
outcomes, other than neurocognitive effects, are discussed elsewhere in this volume.
Summary and Conclusion
The committee reviewed five primary studies (Teuber and Weinstein, 1954; Weinstein
and Teuber, 1957b; Grafman et al., 1988; Corkin et al., 1989; Raymont et al., 2008) and five
secondary studies (Weinstein et al., 1956; Weinstein and Teuber, 1957a; Grafman et al., 1986,
1990; Salazar et al., 1986) of penetrating head injury in military populations. The primary and
secondary studies are consistent in pointing toward a decline in neurocognitive function after
penetrating head injury.
OCR for page 173
NEUROCOGNITIVE OUTCOMES 177
With regard to increased errors on the formboard test, Teuber and Weinstein (1954)
showed that veterans who had penetrating head injury took more time, made more errors, and
recalled fewer forms than the controls. A later study by Weinstein and Teuber (1957b) examined
the change in AGCT score from before injury to after injury and found that subjects who had
penetrating head injury had a greater decline in score than the group who had peripheral nerve
injury independently of preinjury education and preinjury AGCT scores. Grafman et al. (1988)
found cognitive decline after brain injury as measured the AFQT. However, preinjury
intelligence score was the most predictive factor in postinjury intelligence score, followed by the
size of the lesion; the location of the injury was the least important. In contrast, preinjury
education level did not correlate with cognitive decline.
The study of World War II veterans by Corkin et al. (1989) demonstrated poorer
performance on cognitive tests in veterans who had penetrating head injury than in controls and
continued decline over 30 years in the brain-injured veterans on every cognitive measure except
vocabulary, which remained constant. It was noted that the site of the injury exerted a strong
effect on the type of deficits. Finally, the study of Vietnam veterans by Raymont et al. (2008)
demonstrated that exacerbated decline in intelligence over 30–40 years is a significant risk for
veterans with penetrating head injury.
The five secondary studies also showed long-term deficits in neurocognition including
intelligence (Weinstein and Teuber, 1957a); spatial orientation (Weinstein et al., 1956); memory,
reasoning, and arithmetic (Salazar et al., 1986); facial discrimination (Grafman et al., 1986); and
neurocognitive decline as measured with the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (Grafman et al.,
1990).
Those studies, particularly the secondary studies, suffer from various limitations,
including small samples, a focus on injury sites and localization of functional outcomes (which
were outside the committee’s charge), incomplete description of how subjects and controls were
selected, and apparent high rates of loss of the original sample at followup times. However, the
studies had advantages not seen in studies of civilian injury, including the availability of baseline
cognitive test scores and the long-term nature of followup (in some cases, 40 years or more). The
overall body of evidence demonstrates poor neurocognitive outcomes in people who suffer
penetrating head injury.
The committee concludes, on the basis of its evaluation, that there is sufficient
evidence of a relationship between sustaining a penetrating TBI and decline in
neurocognitive function associated with the affected region of the brain and the
volume of brain tissue lost.
OCR for page 173
178
TABLE 6.1 Penetrating Head Injury and Neurocognitive Outcomes
Type of TBI: Mild, Health
Moderate, Severe; Outcomes or
Blunt, Penetrating, Outcome Comments or
Reference Study Design Population Results Adjustments Limitations
Blast Measures
Teuber and Cohort 35 men with brain Penetrating missile Form Board Test Brain-injured Subjects, controls
Weinstein, injury selected injuries of head or subjects took more sustained injuries 5–
1954 from 185 with peripheral nerves time, made more 8 years before testing
missile wounds of errors, recalled
head, 12 controls fewer forms than Subjects grouped on
with peripheral controls basis of location of
nerve injury lesions
wounds of head
controls chosen
from 101 with
missile wounds of
peripheral nerves
Weinstein and Cohort 62 men with loss Penetrating head AGCT Controls had mean Eliminated Preinjury AGCT
Teuber, 1957b of cerebral tissue trauma or peripheral administered 13– increase of 13.0 men with score available for 53
due to penetrating nerve trauma 15 years before AGCT points from aphasic subjects
head trauma, 50 injury (on preinjury to difficulties that
controls with induction into postinjury testing prevented them Preinjury educational
peripheral nerve Army) from reading level determined by
injury Brain-injured practice-test interview and from
AGCT group, excluding questions case records
administered aphasics, had
again 10–12 years average increase of
after injury 5.2 points; total
brain-injured
group had increase
of 1.6 points
Education before
injury did not
influence extent to
which performance
on intelligence test
was affected after
injury
OCR for page 173
Type of TBI: Mild, Health
Moderate, Severe; Outcomes or
Blunt, Penetrating, Outcome Comments or
Reference Study Design Population Results Adjustments
Blast Measures Limitations
Corkin et al., Cohort 84 World War II Penetrating head AGCT (including 10 years after end Matched with Existence of baseline
1989 veterans: 57 with injury; injury severity Total, of war (in 1950s), respect to age, performance,
(This population penetrating head determined by Vocabulary, TBI group had premorbid retesting at 10 and 40
was first seen in injury, 27 with number of cortical Arithmetic, Block poorer intelligence, years after
Teuber’s NY peripheral nerve lobes involved, counting performance on premorbid penetrating brain
laboratory) injury presence of tantalum subscales), figure- both cognitive education injury compared with
plate, history of ground tests appropriate controls
18–34 years old at seizures, use of discrimination are strengths of
time of injury, first anticonvulsant (measured with 30 years after war, study;
testing 10 years medication Hidden Figures TBI veterans, as a possible limitation is
after injury Test) group, exhibited how representative
(1950s), and even poorer the subjects were of
testing 40 years performance on all those injured in
after injury (1980s) every cognitive World War II;
measure except subsamples selected
vocabulary, which from 314 studied by
was constant Teuber and
Weinstein (1956,
1957); age,
performance
correlated only in
brain-injured
subjects, so age-
related factors might
have contributed to
exacerbated decline
Grafman et al., Prospective, long- 263 brain-injured Penetrating head Cognitive- Preinjury AFQT ANOVAs,
1988 term followup of veterans, 64 injury outcome, AFQT score was most multiple
Vietnam War uninjured controls predictive factor regression
veterans (Part of matched on for postinjury analysis
VHIS) preinjury AFQT intelligence scores, performed to
scores followed by brain- assess
volume loss, association
location of injury; between size
preinjury and location of
179
OCR for page 173
180
Type of TBI: Mild, Health
Moderate, Severe; Outcomes or
Blunt, Penetrating, Outcome Comments or
Reference Study Design Population Results Adjustments
Blast Measures Limitations
education level not brain lesions
associated with predicted
cognitive decline cognitive
function after
injury
Raymont et Prospective, long- Subjects drawn Penetrating head Cognitive- At phase 3, no ANOVAs, Those with
al., 2008 term followup of from VHIS injury outcome, AFQT significant linear logistic
penetrating head
Vietnam War registry; 92% had differences and stepwise
injury had lower
Veterans penetrating head between head- multiple AFQT scores at
(part of VHIS injury; of 520 from injured and regressionphase 3 than
phase 3) phase 2, 484 are controls in age, procedurescontrols,
still alive, and 182 education, preformed to
significantly greater
2,000 patients attended phase 3 intelligence assess impact
decrease in AFQT
entered in registry of demographic
score than controls
in 1967–1970 The more global factors, from phase 2 to
the cognitive test, preinjury phase 3 and from
the greater the intelligence,
preinjury to phase 3;
effect of brain- brain-volume
when impact of
volume loss loss, lesion
education, preinjury
location, intelligence, brain
genetic volume loss, lesion
markers onlocation on
cognitive postinjury
ability 36–39
intelligence was
years after
examined, most
injury important
determinant of
postinjury
intelligence was
preinjury
performance as
measured by AFQT
NOTE: AFQT = Armed Forces Qualification Test, AGCT = Army General Classification Test, ANOVA = analysis of variance, TBI = traumatic brain injury,
VHIS = Vietnam Head Injury Study.
OCR for page 173
NEUROCOGNITIVE OUTCOMES 181
CLOSED HEAD INJURY
This section focuses on studies of closed (nonpenetrating) head injuries. These injuries
are typically categorized as mild, moderate, or severe TBI. One of the problems encountered by
the committee in evaluating studies of closed TBI is the difficulty in comparing severity of TBI
among studies. Papers are inconsistent in the measurement of severity, particularly of moderate
TBI.
As in the previous section, primary studies are presented first and followed by secondary
studies, a summary and conclusions, and finally a table (Table 6.2) with information abstracted
from the primary studies.
Primary Studies
The committee selected six primary studies of closed head injury. They differ from the
studies of penetrating head injury in that they examined civilian populations with TBI resulting
from motor-vehicle crashes, falls, assaults, or sports activities.
A study by Dikmen et al. (1986), using a cohort from the trauma center at Harborview
Medical Center in Seattle, Washington (previously described in Chapter 5), examined
neurocognitive outcomes after mild TBI. The head-injured, drawn from a larger cohort, were 20
consecutive patients 15–60 years old who had mild TBI. The 19 controls were friends of the TBI
patients from the larger head-injured group (see Chapter 5) who were matched with regard to
age, education, and sex; exclusionary criteria included evidence of preinjury central nervous
system (CNS) disease or alcoholism. Neuropsychologic tests were administered at 1 month and
12 months after injury; controls were tested at the same intervals. The Halstead-Reitan
Neuropsychological Test Battery and additional measures of memory were administered. The
head-injured group performed slightly less well than the uninjured group on 2 of the 21 measures
(the Seashore Rhythm Test and the Selective Reminding Test) at 1 month after injury. At 1 year,
none of the neuropsychologic measures showed significant differences. Thus, although subtle
neuropsychologic effects were found at 1 month after a mild TBI, they could no longer be
detected at 1 year.
In another study by Dikmen et al. (1987) (see Chapter 5), the relationship between injury
severity and memory was examined in 102 consecutive head-injured patients admitted into
Harborview Medical Center. All patients had sustained blunt head injury; most of the cases were
mild or moderate. The uninjured comparison group consisted of 102 friends of the head-injured
matched on age, education, race, and sex. Head-injury severity was measured with the Glasgow
Coma Scale (GCS), assessed within 24 hours of injury to determine the depth of coma; time
from injury to consistent ability to follow simple commands (TFC), used as an index of coma
length; and posttraumatic amnesia (PTA), used to determine the length of impaired
consciousness. The Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS) and the Selective Reminding Test (SRT)
were used at 1 and 12 months after injury. The head-injured group performed more poorly than
the uninjured controls (p < 0.001) on each of the subscales of the WMS and the SRT. Similarly,
at 1 year, there was significant impairment on most subscales of the tests administered. However,
head-injured patients performed better at 1 year than at 1 month. With regard to severity of
OCR for page 173
182 GULF WAR AND HEALTH
injury, only those with deep or prolonged impaired consciousness (TFC over 1 day, PTA at least
14 days, and GCS less than 8) were performing significantly worse at 1 year than the controls.
Dikmen et al. (1995) conducted a prospective study of 436 adults with mild, moderate, or
severe TBI recruited at the time of injury from Harborview Medical Center, a level 1 trauma
center (see Chapter 5). The study included English-speaking adults who had TBI with loss of
consciousness for any period or PTA for at least 1 hour or with objective evidence of TBI (such
as hematoma) and who were hospitalized and survived at least 1 month after injury. Most TBI
patients (74%) had sustained their injuries in motor-vehicle crashes (car or motorcycle drive,
pedestrian, or bicyclist), 11% in falls, 8% in fights or assaults, and the remaining 6% in other
activities. Controls were 121 patients admitted into the emergency room at Harborview Medical
Center after injury to any part of the body except the head and matched to the TBI cases on age,
sex, and education. Subjects and controls received a neuropsychologic assessment at 1 year after
injury, which included the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery and additional
measures of attention and memory. The battery evaluated various neuropsychologic functions,
including sensory and motor skills, attention, concentration, memory, verbal and visuospatial
intellectual skills, and executive function, such as problem solving and flexibility of thinking. A
year after injury, the TBI group performed significantly worse than controls on 18 of the 21
measures used for comparison. There was a dose–response relationship: longer coma (from time
of injury to consistently following commands) was associated with greater neurocognitive
impairment. Fifty percent of the subjects with the most severe TBI (those with TFC of 29 days or
longer) were cognitively too impaired even to be formally tested.
Tate et al. (1991) studied a consecutive series of 87 of 100 patients who had severe TBI
and were admitted into a rehabilitation facility in Australia. The patients, 15–45 years old, were
compared with sibling controls on 15 factors related to various neurobehavioral impairments. Of
the TBI patients, 70% had current and clinically significant impairments. Disorders of learning
and memory were the most common findings 6 years after injury and differed between TBI
patients (56.5%) and controls (5%). Disturbances in basic neurocognition (such as orientation,
visual perception, dyspraxia, and language) were least frequent (16.5% in TBI patients and 2.5%
in controls). Slowness in information processing was found in 34.1% of the TBI patients and
2.5% of the controls, and posttraumatic personality changes were found in 40% of the TBI
patients, while only 7.5% of the controls exhibited personality changes. The differences appear
large, but the authors did not provide tests of their significance.
Lannoo et al. (1998) examined neurocognitive outcomes in 85 consecutive patients who
had moderate to severe head injury and were admitted into the intensive care unit (ICU) of the
University Hospital of Ghent in Belgium from September 1993 to February 1996 with a GCS
score of 3–12. The patients were 15–65 years old and had no previous history of CNS disease or
mental retardation. The control group consisted of 32 trauma patients who had injuries of the
body but not the head and were admitted into the ICU during the same study period. The controls
were also 15–65 years old and had no previous history of CNS disease or mental retardation.
Neuropsychologic testing was completed at 6 months after injury in 79 of the TBI patients (93%)
and 22 of the controls (69%). The neuropsychologic test battery consisted of measures of
attention and information processing, visual reaction time, memory and learning, verbal fluency,
and mental flexibility. A multivariate analysis of variance on neuropsychologic test performance
revealed that the TBI group performed significantly below the control group at 6 months after
injury on most of the test measures.
OCR for page 173
NEUROCOGNITIVE OUTCOMES 183
Heitger et al. (2006) studied 37 patients who had mild TBI and presented to Christchurch
Hospital, New Zealand, and compared them with 37 controls individually matched to each case
with respect to age, sex, and years of formal education. The controls were volunteers recruited
through a database at the Department of Psychology of the University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand. Patients and controls were assessed at 1 week, 3 months, and 6
months injury; and 31 pairs were at 12 months after injury. Neurocognitive assessments included
tests of attention, working memory, episodic memory, and speed of information processing and
used the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test, the California Verbal Learning Test-I (CVLT-I),
the Symbol Digit Modalities Test, and the Trail Making Test. General cognitive performance
was evaluated with the vocabulary and matrix-reasoning subtests of the Wechsler Abbreviated
Scale of Intelligence. Results at 3 and 6 months showed deficits in verbal learning in the mild-
TBI group, but results of neurocognitive tests at 12 months showed no deficits except for a
marginal difference on the CVLT total standard score (p < 0.07).
Secondary Studies
The committee chose 17 secondary studies for review. The studies discussed here did not
meet the committee’s criteria for primary studies as described in Chapter 4. In this discussion,
the studies are grouped as follows: TBI associated with sports and then mild TBI, moderate or
severe TBI, and varied severity typically in populations other than athletes.
Traumatic Brain Injury Associated with Sports
People involved in various sports may suffer repeated head injuries, including
concussions and mild TBIs. It is often difficult to determine whether the outcome of an injury is
related to a single incident or to repeated incidents. When TBI is determined retrospectively by
self-report, especially after a period of months or years, it is difficult to be certain about the
reliability and validity of the report; this is the case particularly in sports injuries.
Studies of TBI associated with sports have found some evidence of long-term cognitive
dysfunction (Matser et al., 1998, 1999, 2001; Guskiewicz et al., 2005; Moser et al., 2005; Wall et
al., 2006), but the findings are not entirely consistent (Straume-Naesheim et al., 2005). Moser et
al. (2005) studied 223 high school athletes (13–19 years old) who participated in a variety of
sports (primarily ice hockey, football, field hockey, lacrosse, and soccer). The authors sought to
identify the long-term effects of self-reported concussion on neuropsychologic functioning by
determining whether there were any differences among four groups of athletes: the recently
concussed (within 1 week of neuropsychologic testing), those with no concussion history, those
with one concussion sustained at least 6 months previously, and those with two or more
concussions sustained at least 6 months previously. The results indicated significant differences
among the groups in attention (p = 0.012) and cognitive flexibility and executive functioning (p
= 0.006). Post hoc analysis demonstrated that recently concussed athletes perform worse on the
attention measure than athletes with no concussion history or a history of one concussion and
worse on the cognitive-flexibility measure than those with no concussion history. There were no
differences between those with recent concussions and those with two or more concussions on
any measures; the authors suggest that this indicates long-term neuropsychologic effects in those
with multiple concussions. However, the authors do not report significant differences between
athletes with two or more concussions and those with no concussion or one concussion, so their
conclusions are uninterpretable.
OCR for page 173
186 GULF WAR AND HEALTH
functioning before injury or before exposure. The problem here is that demographic differences
between the groups may have predated the exposures and potential TBIs, and this would make
interpretation of results difficult.
Mild Traumatic Brain Injury
Vanderploeg et al. (2005) examined long-term neurocognitive outcomes of self-reported
mild TBI in a nonreferred sample of male veterans. The study was a cross-sectional cohort of
veterans derived from the Vietnam Experience Study (see Chapter 5). Veterans were questioned
about health-related events that may have occurred any time in the roughly 16 years from
military discharge to the time of the study. A subsample of veterans (excluding 40 who were
hospitalized after injury and the 38 for whom data were incomplete) were categorized into three
groups based on subjects’ responses on a questionnaire: no history of motor-vehicle accident
(MVA) and no history of TBI (normal controls, n = 3,214), injured in an MVA but no history of
TBI (MVA controls, n = 539), and TBI with altered consciousness (mild TBI, n = 254). A 15-
measure neuropsychologic battery and neurologic tests of tandem gait and peripheral visual
attention were administered. Results revealed no statistically significant difference in any of the
neuropsychologic measures among the three groups. However, on the basis of further
exploratory analyses of the data, the authors concluded that the mild-TBI group showed more
proactive interference on the verbal-learning measure and a tendency to give up more than
controls on difficult attention tasks. The results of the study are limited by the long retrospective,
self-reporting nature of the data, which could introduce considerable error.
Moderate or Severe Traumatic Brain Injury
Ruff et al. (1986) assessed neurocognitive functioning after TBI in 15 patients who had
moderate TBI (GCS, 9–12), 20 patients who had severe TBI (GCS, 3–8), and 50 healthy
controls. All patients were tested at least 6 months after injury; mean duration between injury
and assessment was 1 year in patients with moderate TBI and 2 years in those with severe TBI.
The subjects were given a battery of neuropsychologic tests, including IQ, motor, memory,
attention, and fluency measures. Although the moderate-TBI group performed worse on all
measures than the healthy control group, differences were significant only on the fluency
measures. In contrast, the severe-TBI group was significantly different from the healthy controls
on almost all measures. The severe-TBI group performed significantly worse than the moderate-
TBI group in IQ, attention, and fluency measures.
Zec et al. (2001) compared long-term memory impairment in 32 severe-TBI patients
living independently or in an intermediate-care facility at least 2 years after injury, 15 spinal-
cord–injury patients, and 27 uninjured controls. The TBI patients were in coma or had altered
consciousness for at least 3 days. Of the TBI patients, 25 (78%) had either hemiplegia (15) or
quadriplegia (10), 19 (59%) had premorbid histories of at least mild alcohol or drug use, and 8
(25%) were intoxicated or under the influence of drugs at the time of injury. Spinal-cord–injury
patients were recruited from the same facilities as the TBI patients, had sustained a severe spinal-
cord injury, and were at least 2 years after injury. Of that group, 13 (87%) were quadriplegic, and
2 (13%) were paraplegic. The 27 healthy controls were matched for premorbid socioeconomic
background and had no statistically significant differences in age and education from the other
groups. A comprehensive neuropsychologic battery was administered to assess intelligence,
OCR for page 173
NEUROCOGNITIVE OUTCOMES 187
achievement, general cognitive functioning, and memory. The TBI group scored significantly
worse than the spinal-cord–injury and control groups on almost all the tests.
Bate et al. (2001) studied 35 consecutive patients admitted into an outpatient
rehabilitation center over a 3-year period to identify discrete deficits of attention. All patients had
severe TBI as defined by a GCS under 8 or PTA over 24 hours. Thirty-five controls were
matched on age, premorbid IQ, and education. Participants and controls were given an attention
test and an auditory language task. The TBI participants’ reaction times were significantly longer
than those of the controls, but TBI participants and controls oriented their visual attention in a
similar manner. TBI participants made significantly more errors on the auditory language task
than controls when they were performing under dual-task conditions; this suggested a deficit in
auditory-verbal attention.
Incoccia et al. (2004) studied reaction time in 18 people who had severe TBI (GCS, under
8 for at least 6 hours), a mean interval since injury of 39 months (SD, 38 months), and an
average coma duration of 20 days (SD, 12.8 days); their mean age was 32 years (SD, 12.6 years).
All TBI participants had good motor recovery as evaluated clinically and had good recovery on
the Glasgow Outcome Scale. The controls were 36 people who were closely matched in age and
schooling. Simple visual stimuli (alertness condition) and the go-no-go tests (which require
response inhibition under particular conditions) were administered. In the test with simple visual
stimuli, the TBI group and the controls performed similarly; in the go-no-go tests, the TBI group
performed more slowly. The authors noted that the findings indicate that people with TBI show
deficits in motor programming despite good motor recovery as evaluated clinically.
Studies of Varied Severity: Mild, Moderate, or Severe Traumatic Brain Injury
Novack et al. (2000) prospectively examined 72 patients who had TBI to assess cognitive
and functional recovery. Inclusion criteria involved loss of consciousness (any duration), skull
fracture, PTA (any duration), and objective neurologic findings. Most subjects (49, 68%)
sustained a severe TBI (GCS no higher than 8). Subjects were evaluated at 6 and 12 months after
injury with a battery of neuropsychologic tests to assess orientation, speed of information
processing, concentration, memory, constructional abilities, and verbal skills. Test scores were
transformed to standard scores by using norms that account for age and education effects, if
available. Change in performance from 6 to 12 months after injury was analyzed. Although
participants with severe TBI continued to perform worse than participants with mild to moderate
TBI, both groups recovered at a similar rate.
Summary and Conclusions
The committee reviewed 6 primary studies and 17 secondary studies. Primary and
secondary studies are consistent in demonstrating sufficient evidence of an association between
severe brain injury and neurocognitive deficit. Neurocognitive impairments result in a host of
difficulties in people who sustain severe TBI, ranging from attention, memory, information-
processing speed, and executive functions to even more robust functions, such as language and
visuospatial constructional skills. Such deficits are likely to affect psychosocial outcomes, such
as the ability to drive, return to work, and adjust successfully to societal demands (see Chapter
9).
OCR for page 173
188 GULF WAR AND HEALTH
However, there is limited/suggestive evidence that moderate TBI is associated with
neurocognitive deficits. Assessment of outcomes in moderate TBI is complicated by the use of
many criteria for categorizing “mild,” “moderate,” and “severe” injuries. Thus, in some studies,
persons with “moderate” injuries had significantly greater indications of injury (more similar to
other categorizations of “severe” injuries), whereas in other studies, persons with “moderate”
injuries had significantly smaller indications of injury (more similar to other categorizations of
“mild” injuries). The lack of consensus about what constitutes a “moderate” injury complicates
understanding of the effects of such injuries.
There is inadequate and insufficient evidence of association between mild TBI and
neurocognitive deficits more than 6 months after injury. Although there are known to be
subjective neurocognitive complaints in some persons with mild TBI after 6 months, the studies
show inconsistent results with regard to objective measures of neurocognitive performance in
this group.
The committee concludes, on the basis of its evaluation, that there is sufficient
evidence of an association between severe TBI and neurocognitive deficits.
The committee concludes, on the basis of its evaluation, that there is
limited/suggestive evidence of an association between moderate TBI and
neurocognitive deficits.
The committee concludes, on the basis of its evaluation, that there is
inadequate/insufficient evidence to determine whether an association exists
between mild TBI and neurocognitive deficits.
OCR for page 173
TABLE 6.2 Closed Head Injury and Neurocognitive Outcomes
Type of TBI: Health
Mild, Moderate, Outcomes or
Severe; Blunt, Outcome Comments or
Reference Study Design Population Results Adjustments Limitations
Penetrating, Blast Measures
Dikmen et al., Prospective 436 adults, Minimal severity At 1 year after injury: Controls
Subjects assessed Study subjects
1995 cohort head-injured patients criteria: any period head-injured
1 mo, 1 year after matched on age, included 85% of
recruited at time of of LOC, PTA for significantly worse
injury sex, education 514 subjects
injury in one of three at least 1 h, or than controls (p < recruited from
Neuropsychologic 0.01) on
prospective other objective Results represent three longitudinal
tests included
longitudinal studies: evidence of head neuropsychologic tests weighted studies
Halstead Reitan except difference on averages that
behavioral outcome trauma
Neuropsycho-
of head injury, Category Test adjust for
logical Test
patient characteristics Head-injury (p < 0.05) differences
Battery; motor
and head-injury severity assessed between studies
function assessed Nonsignificant
outcome, Dilantin with GCS, number in inclusion
with finger-
prophylaxis of of nonreactive differences on two criteria
tapping, name-
posttraumatic pupils, mass memory measures
writing for
seizures lesions requiring
dominant,
craniotomy, TFC Severely head-injured
nondominant
121 general TCs (TFC 29 days or
hands; attention, greater) had
enrolled as part of Coma from < 1 h
concentration,
patient- to more than 4 significant
flexibility,
characteristics study weeks impairments on all
quickness measures (p < 0.001)
measured with except WMS-LM (p <
Seashore Rhythm 0.01), WMS-VR (p <
Test, TMT A and 0.05)
TMT B, Stroop
Color and Word Clear dose–response
Test Parts 1 and relationship between
2; memory length of coma (TFC),
evaluated with level of performance
WMS, WMS-LM, on neuropsychologic
WMS-VR, SR; measures; for
verbal skills example, median II
measured with for TC = 0.1; TFC < 1
WAIS VIQ; h = 0.1, 1–24 h = 0.3,
performance 25 h–6 days = 0.4, 7–
189
skills measured 13 days = 0.4, 14–28
OCR for page 173
190
Type of TBI: Health
Mild, Moderate, Outcomes or
Severe; Blunt, Outcome Comments or
Reference Study Design Population Results Adjustments
Penetrating, Blast Measures Limitations
with WAIS PIQ, days = 0.7, 29 days
Tactual = 1.0
Performance Test;
reasoning
measured with
Category Test;
overall
performance
measured with
Halstead
Impairment Index
Dikmen et al., Prospective 20 hospitalized Mild; subjects met Motor, 1 mo after TBI, mild Matched on age, Exclusion criteria:
1986 cohort subjects with mild following criteria: psychomotor neuropsychologic education, sex subjects with prior
head injury; 19 coma not over 1 h skills (finger- effects found, none head injury,
uninjured friend or, if no coma, tapping speed); significantly different; alcoholism,
controls PTA of at least 1 h; attention, at 1 year after TBI, cerebral disease,
GCS 12 on flexibility, similar post-TBI mental retardation,
19 of 20 seen at 1 admission; no quickness symptoms reported in significant
year clinical evidence (Speech Sounds TBI, non-TBI subjects psychiatric
of cortical or Perception, disorder
brainstem Seashore Rhythm,
contusion TMT A, TMT B); 15–60 years old
memory and
learning (WMS, Healthy friend
SR); reasoning controls may not
(Category Test); control for general
health status in effects of trauma
terms of sickness
(Sickness Impact Small sample
Profile);
symptoms
frequently
reported as part of
TBI (Head Injury
Symptom
OCR for page 173
Type of TBI: Health
Mild, Moderate, Outcomes or
Severe; Blunt, Outcome Comments or
Reference Study Design Population Results Adjustments
Penetrating, Blast Measures Limitations
Checklist);
resumption of
major activities,
including work,
school,
homemaking
(Function Status
Index)
Dikmen et al., Prospective 102 people with Mild, moderate, Memory (WMS, At 1 mo after TBI, Matched on age, Exclusion criteria:
1987 cohort closed head injury severe SRP) head-injured group education, race, prior CNS injury,
admitted into performed sex significant
Harborview Medical Subjects met significantly worse on neuropsychiatric
Center, Seattle; 102 following criteria: both memory tests (p difficulties
friend controls LOC or PTA over < 0.001); at 1 year
1 h or evidence of after TBI, most 15–60 years old
97 of 102 head- cerebral trauma subscales still show
injured, 88 of 102 significant impairment
controls evaluated at 30% GCS 3–8,
1 year after injury 12% GCS 9–11, Memory performance
59% GCS > 12 a function of head-
injury severity, length
23% PTA < 24 h, of coma at 1 mo;
25% PTA 1–6 weaker relationship at
days, 20% PTA 7– 1 year after TBI
13 days, 32% PTA
> 14 days
77% moving-
vehicle accidents,
10% falls, 8%
fights or assaults,
5% other
Tate et al., 1991 Cohort Consecutive series of Severe, blunt TBI: Subjects 70% of head-injured Controls Australian
first 100 admissions sustained open examined by showed impairments: matched on age, rehabilitation
into adult head-injury head injury, initial trained clinical 56.5% of head-injured sex, education, population
191
OCR for page 173
192
Type of TBI: Health
Mild, Moderate, Outcomes or
Severe; Blunt, Outcome Comments or
Reference Study Design Population Results Adjustments
Penetrating, Blast Measures Limitations
rehabilitation unit closed head injury neuropsychologist had disorders of SES
later required learning, memory vs 82 of 100 subjects
Followed average of neurosurgery Neuropsychologic 5% in sibling control completed
6.3 years after impairment group; neuropsychologic
trauma evaluated with
Head-injured 16.5% of head-injured tests
MMS, Incomplete had disturbances in
group sustained
Eligible: 66 males, severe injuries: Letters, basic neurocognitive 15–45 years old
21 females, sibling 98% had PTA over ideomotor praxis skills vs 2.5% in
controls tasks, ROCF,
1 week, 74% over sibling control group; Crude ORs
WAIS-R Digit
1 mo 34.1% of head-injured
Span and had slowness in
Vocabulary information
subtests, Schonell processing vs 2.5% in
Reading Test, sibling control group;
TMT, SR, AM, 40% of head-injured
Corsi test of had posttraumatic
recency memory, personality change vs
WCST, TT, Word 7.5% in sibling
Fluency Test of control group
Thurstone and
Thurstone, DF,
BCT
Lannoo et al., Cohort 85 patients Moderate to severe Administered MANOVA on Inclusion criteria
1998 consecutively TBI neuropsychologic neuropsychologic test for patients and
admitted into the (GCS score 3–12) test battery at 6 battery indicated controls: ages 15–
ICU of University mo after injury, significant difference 65 years, no
Hospital of Gent including tests of: between groups (p < history of CNS
in September 1993– attention, 0.05); univariate disease or mental
February 1996 information analyses showed retardation
processing; visual significant differences
32 TCs (traumatic reaction time; (p < 0.05) on almost
injuries of parts of memory, all tests, with TBI
body other than learning; verbal group performing
head) admitted into fluency; mental worst
ICU during same flexibility
OCR for page 173
Type of TBI: Health
Mild, Moderate, Outcomes or
Severe; Blunt, Outcome Comments or
Reference Study Design Population Results Adjustments
Penetrating, Blast Measures Limitations
study period
Heitger et al., Prospective 37 patients with mild Mild Neurocognitive At 12 mo, no Controls Exclusion criteria
2006 cohort head injury, 37 testing: PASAT, neurocognitive matched on age, included alcohol
controls; patients TMT A and TMT deficits remained sex, education or drug use; CNS
recruited from ED of B, WASI disorder;
Christchurch Marginal group psychiatric
Hospital, New differences on CVLT conditions;
Zealand; controls total standard score structural brain
recruited from damage or
database of interested hematoma on CT
students scan; oculomotor
or somatomotor
deficits;
strabismus, poor
visual acuity, skull
fracture, or history
of prior TBI
NOTE: AM = Austin Maze, BCT = Booklet Category Test, CNS = central nervous system, CT = computed tomography, CVLT = California Verbal Learning
Test, DF = Design Fluency Test, ED = emergency department, GCS = Glasgow Coma Scale, ICU = intensive care unit, LOC = loss of consciousness,
MANOVA = multivariate analysis of variance, MMS = Mini Mental Status, OR = odds ratio, PASAT = Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test, PIQ =
performance intelligence quotient, PTA = posttraumatic amnesia, ROCF = Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test, SES = socioeconomic status, SR = Selective
Reminding Test, SRP = Selective Reminding Procedure, TBI = traumatic brain injury, TC = trauma control, TFC = time to follow commands, TMT A and
TMT B = Trail Making Test A and B, TT = Tower of London Test, VIQ = Verbal Intelligence Quotient, WAIS = Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, WAIS-R =
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Revised, WASI = Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence, WCST = Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, WMS = Wechsler
Memory Scale, WMS-LM = Wechsler Memory Scale, Logical Memory, WMS-VR = Wechsler Memory Scale-Visual Reproduction.
193
OCR for page 173
194 GULF WAR AND HEALTH
REFERENCES
Bate, A. J., J. L. Mathias, and J. R. Crawford. 2001. The covert orienting of visual attention
following severe traumatic brain injury. Journal of Clinical and Experimental
Neuropsychology 23(3):386–398.
Butler, R. J., W. I. Forsythe, D. W. Beverly, and L. M. Adams. 1993. A prospective controlled
investigation of the cognitive effects of amateur boxing. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery
and Psychiatry 56(10):1055–1061.
Corkin, S., T. J. Rosen, E. V. Sullivan, and R. A. Clegg. 1989. Penetrating head injury in young
adulthood exacerbates cognitive decline in later years. Journal of Neuroscience 9(11):3876–
3883.
Damasio, H., T. Grabowski, R. Frank, A. M. Galaburda, and A. R. Damasio. 1994. The return of
Phineas Gage: Clues about the brain from the skull of a famous patient. Science
264(5162):1102–1105.
Dikmen, S., A. McLean, and N. Temkin. 1986. Neuropsychological and psychosocial
consequences of minor head injury. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry
49(11):1227–1232.
Dikmen, S., N. Temkin, A. McLean, A. Wyler, and J. Machamer. 1987. Memory and head injury
severity. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 50(12):1613–1618.
Dikmen, S. S., J. E. Machamer, H. Winn, and N. R. Temkin. 1995. Neuropsychological outcome
at 1-year post head injury. Neuropsychology 9(1):80–90.
Grafman, J., B. Jonas, and A. Salazar. 1990. Wisconsin card sorting test performance based on
location and size of neuroanatomical lesion in Vietnam veterans with penetrating head injury.
Perceptual and Motor Skills 71(3 Pt 2):1120–1122.
Grafman, J., B. S. Jonas, A. Martin, A. M. Salazar, H. Weingartner, C. Ludlow, M. A. Smutok,
and S. C. Vance. 1988. Intellectual function following penetrating head injury in Vietnam
veterans. Brain 111(Pt 1):169–184.
Grafman, J., A. M. Salazar, H. Weingartner, and D. Amin. 1986. Face memory and
discrimination: An analysis of the persistent effects of penetrating brain wounds.
International Journal of Neuroscience 29(1–2):125–139.
Guskiewicz, K. M., S. W. Marshall, J. Bailes, M. McCrea, R. C. Cantu, C. Randolph, and B. D.
Jordan. 2005. Association between recurrent concussion and late-life cognitive impairment in
retired professional football players. Neurosurgery 57(4):719–726.
Haas, L. F. 2001. Phineas Gage and the science of brain localisation. Journal of Neurology,
Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 71(6):761.
Heitger, M. H., R. D. Jones, J. C. Dalrymple-Alford, C. M. Frampton, M. W. Ardagh, and T. J.
Anderson. 2006. Motor deficits and recovery during the first year following mild closed head
injury. Brain Injury 20(8):807–824.
Incoccia, C., R. Formisano, P. Muscato, G. Reali, and P. Zoccolotti. 2004. Reaction and
movement times in individuals with chronic traumatic brain injury with good motor
recovery. Cortex 40(1):111–115.
OCR for page 173
NEUROCOGNITIVE OUTCOMES 195
Lannoo, E., F. Colardyn, T. Vandekerckhove, C. De Deyne, G. de Soete, and C. Jannes. 1998.
Subjective complaints versus neuropsychological test performance after moderate to severe
head injury. Acta Neurochirurgica (Wien) 140:245–253.
Matser, E. J., A. Kessels, B. Jordan, M. Lezak, and J. Troost. 1998. Chronic traumatic brain
injury in professional soccer players. Neurology 51(3):791–796.
Matser, E. J., A. G. Kessels, M. D. Lezak, B. D. Jordan, and J. Troost. 1999. Neuropsychological
impairment in amateur soccer players. JAMA 282(10):971–973.
Matser, J. T., A. G. Kessels, M. D. Lezak, and J. Troost. 2001. A dose-response relation of
headers and concussions with cognitive impairment in professional soccer players. Journal of
Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 23(6):770–774.
Moser, R. S., P. Schatz, and B. D. Jordan. 2005. Prolonged effects of concussion in high school
athletes. Neurosurgery 57(2):300–306.
Murelius, O., and Y. Haglund. 1991. Does Swedish amateur boxing lead to chronic brain
damage? 4. A retrospective neuropsychological study. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica
83(1):9–13.
Novack, T. A., A. L. Alderson, B. A. Bush, J. M. Meythaler, and K. Canupp. 2000. Cognitive
and functional recovery at 6 and 12 months post-TBI. Brain Injury 14(11):987–996.
Porter, M. D. 2003. A 9-year controlled prospective neuropsychologic assessment of amateur
boxing. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine 13(6):339–352.
Porter, M. D., and P. A. Fricker. 1996. Controlled prospective neuropsychological assessment of
active experienced amateur boxers. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine 6(2):90–96.
Ratiu, P., I. F. Talos, S. Haker, D. Lieberman, and P. Everett. 2004. The tale of Phineas Gage,
digitally remastered. Journal of Neurotrauma 21(5):637–643.
Raymont, V., A. Greathouse, K. Reding, R. Lipsky, A. Salazar, and J. Grafman. 2008.
Demographic, structural and genetic predictors of late cognitive decline after penetrating
head injury. Brain 131:543–558.
Ruff, R. M., R. Evans, and L. F. Marshall. 1986. Impaired verbal and figural fluency after head
injury. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 1(2):87–101.
Salazar, A. M., J. Grafman, S. Schlesselman, S. C. Vance, J. P. Mohr, M. Carpenter, P. Pevsner,
C. Ludlow, and H. Weingartner. 1986. Penetrating war injuries of the basal forebrain:
Neurology and cognition. Neurology 36(4):459–465.
Silver, J. M., T. W. McAllister, and S. C. Yudofsky, eds. 2005. Textbook of Traumatic Brain
Injury. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
Straume-Naesheim, T. M., T. E. Andersen, J. Dvorak, and R. Bahr. 2005. Effects of heading
exposure and previous concussions on neuropsychological performance among Norwegian
elite footballers. British Journal of Sports Medicine 39(Suppl 1):i70–i77.
Tate, R. L., B. Fenelon, M. L. Manning, and M. Hunter. 1991. Patterns of neuropsychological
impairment after severe blunt head injury. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease
179(3):117–126.
Teuber, H. L., and S. Weinstein. 1954. Performance on a formboard-task after penetrating brain
injury. Journal of Psychology 38:177–190.
OCR for page 173
196 GULF WAR AND HEALTH
Vanderploeg, R. D., G. Curtiss, and H. G. Belanger. 2005. Long-term neuropsychological
outcomes following mild traumatic brain injury. Journal of the International
Neuropsychological Society 11(3):228–236.
Wall, S., W. Williams, S. Cartwright-Hatton, T. Kelly, J. Murray, M. Murray, A. Owen, and M.
Turner. 2006. Neuropsychological dysfunction following repeat concussions in jockeys.
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 77(4):518–520.
Weinstein, S., and H. L. Teuber. 1957a. Effects of penetrating brain injury on intelligence test
scores. Science 125(3256):1036–1037.
Weinstein, S., J. Semmes, L. Ghent, and H. L. Teuber. 1956. Spatial orientation in man after
cerebral injury: II. Analysis according to concomitant defects. Journal of Psychology
42:249–263.
———. 1957b. The role of preinjury education and intelligence level in intellecetual loss after
brain injury. Journal of Comparitive and Physiological Psychology 50:535–539.
Zec, R. F., D. Zellers, J. Belman, J. Miller, J. Matthews, D. Ferneau-Belman, and R. Robbs.
2001. Long-term consequences of severe closed head injury on episodic memory. Journal of
Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 23(5):671–691.