Correlations between neuropsychological test results and P300 latency during silent-count and button-press tasks in post-traumatic brain injury patients

Abstract

Abstract:To evaluate the correlations between memory function and intelligence and event-related potential, the P300 component for different tasks was studied for 30 post-traumatic brain injury patients (mean age 31.6 ± 13.7 years; 23 male and 7 female). Memory function, intelligence, and depression were measured by using the Mini-Mental State Examination, the revised Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale and the Self-Rating Depression Scale, respectively. P300 latency was measured during silent-count and button-press tests at three midline scalp (Fz, Cz, and Pz) sites for all subjects by using an auditory 'odd-ball' paradigm. Neuropsychological memory score was predicted by intelligence score, but neurophysiological P300 latency was predicted by memory score for the silent-count test and by intelligence score for the button-press test. These results show that the P300 event-related potential component is sensitive to the diverse nature of cognitive deficits in post-traumatic brain injury patients during different types of discrimination tasks.However, future research is necessary to replicate and extend these findings.

Correlations between event-related potentials with pictures recognition and WMS-RC scores in patients with memory disorder caused by severe traumatic brain injury

“…Some components of ERP, such as P300, showed only low or moderate relevance with intelligence and memory [13,14] , and some researchers believe it is due to the simplicity of the scale adopted, such as Oddball Scale [15] . In our study, the picture recognition method is similar to some parts of WMS-RC, the remembering and recognition is far more difficult than Oddball task, which only calls for the differentiation of low-frequent and high-frequent sounds.…”

Evaluation of traumatic brain injury: Brain potentials in diagnosis, function, and prognosis

“…(Duncan et al, 1994(Duncan et al, , 2003(Duncan et al, , 2009Johnson, 1989aJohnson, , 1989bPolich, 2007). The majority of ERP studies of TBI have used auditory tasks (Elting et al, 2005(Elting et al, , 2008Lew et al, 2007a;Naito et al, 2005;Reza et al, 2006Reza et al, , 2007Rousseff et al, 2006;Sarno et al, 2006;Segalowitz et al, 1997Segalowitz et al, , 2001Solbakk et al, 1999Solbakk et al, , 2002. Others have used visual tasks (Broglio et al, 2009;LaChapelle et al, 2008;Lew et al, 2005b;Roche et al, 2004), and a few have used tasks in both modalities (Bernstein, 2002;Doi et al, 2007;Duncan et al, 2003Duncan et al, , 2005Lew et al, 2004Lew et al, , 2007cLew et al, , 2009.…”

“…Variations in the task used to elicit ERPs may also affect the results of studies of TBI survivors (Bernstein, 2002;Doi et al, 2007;Duncan et al, 2003Duncan et al, , 2005Lew et al, 2007c;Reza et al, 2006;Sarno et al, 2006;Segalowitz et al, 2001). Task variations include presenting an oddball paradigm in which auditory stimuli vary in duration (Bernstein, 2002;Segalowitz et al, 2001), using a motor response (button press) versus keeping a silent count of target stimuli (Reza et al, 2006), or counting silently versus passive listening (Sarno et al, 2006).…”

“…Task variations include presenting an oddball paradigm in which auditory stimuli vary in duration (Bernstein, 2002;Segalowitz et al, 2001), using a motor response (button press) versus keeping a silent count of target stimuli (Reza et al, 2006), or counting silently versus passive listening (Sarno et al, 2006). Other manipulations involve varying task demands among discrimination tasks (simple, go/no-go, and choice response; Duncan et al, 2003) or using a challenging task (such as the Continuous Performance Test; Duncan et al, 2005).…”

“…In a study of survivors of moderate to severe TBI, Reza et al (2006) compared ERPs elicited in auditory oddball tasks requiring a silent count or a button press response. They observed that the counting task elicited P300s with longer latencies than those elicited in the button press task, although the difference was significant only at Cz.…”