Test of Everyday Attention in patients with chronic stroke: Test–retest reliability and practice effects. (September 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Chen, Hui-Chun; Koh, Chia-Lin; Hsieh, Ching-Lin; Hsueh, I-Ping
• Is Part Of: Brain injury. Volume 27:Number 10(2013)
• Page Start: 1148
• Page End: 1154
• Publication Date: 2013-09
• Subjects: Brain damage -- Periodicals; Brain -- Wounds and injuries -- Periodicals; Brain Injuries -- Periodicals; 617.481
• DOI: 10.3109/02699052.2013.775483
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0269-9052

Abstract

<abstract> <title>Abstract</title> <p> <italic>Objective</italic>: To examine the measurement properties of Test of Everyday Attention (TEA) in patients with chronic stroke including: test–retest reliability between parallel forms (i.e. forms AB, BC and CA), practice effect and critical values for detecting true change corrected for practice effect and measurement error.</p> <p> <italic>Methods</italic>: Ninety patients with chronic stroke (months since onset >6) were randomly assigned to receive forms AB, BC or CA of the TEA in a counterbalanced order. A test–retest design was used with a 1-week interval.</p> <p> <italic>Results</italic>: All TEA sub-tests had good-to-excellent test–retest reliability among the three parallel forms except the <italic>Telephone Search While Counting</italic> (ICC = 0.51–0.59). Small practice effects were observed for almost all sub-tests. The reliable change index corrected for practice effect (RCI<sub>p</sub>) was provided for each sub-test.</p> <p> <italic>Conclusions</italic>: Most TEA sub-tests show promise as reliable measures of attention for repeated use with the parallel forms in patients with chronic stroke. Practice effects must be considered to interpret an individual change in clinical settings. Therefore, the value of RCI<sub>p</sub> provides a conservative estimate of a patient's progress, representing the smallest change in the TEA score that could be interpreted as true change, corrected for practice effects and measurement error.</p> </abstract>