Application of new technologies in neuropsychological evaluation
Keywords:
distance assessment, cyberneuropsychology, videoconferencing, telemedicine, distance neuropsychology.Abstract
Through the integration of technology and the use of tablets, telephones, or laptops, remote assessment becomes a reality in various fields of health and neuroscience; This has allowed significant technological advancements over the years. Despite this, neuropsychological evaluation continues to be based primarily on pencil-and-paper tests. The aim of this review is to provide information about the evidence that exists for remote neuropsychological evaluation, the benefits and the ethical considerations that these entail for the health professional and neuropsychological patients. The UNAM databases were used: ELSEVIER, APA, OVID, EBSCO, as well as PUBMED, SCIENCE DIRECT. The access of patients to neuropsychological services at a distance would allow faster results in addition to the fact that digital evaluations allow access to populations with difficult access or displacement due to difficulties in reaching the clinic (eg, limited mobility, unreliable transport) and difficulty mobilizing in the context of the global pandemic.Downloads
References
ADJORLOLO, S. Y CHOON, H. C. 2015. Forensic Assessment via Videoconferencing: Issues and Practice Considerations. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice 15(3): 185-204. doi: 10.1080/15228932.2015.1015363.
AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION. 1998. Telepsychiatry Via Videoconferencing. American Psychiatric Association Reference Document No. 980021. APA, Washington, DC.
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION. 2002. Principios éticos de los psicólogos y código de conducta American Psychological Association (APA).
AMERICAN TELEMEDICINE ASSOCIATION 2009. Practice guidelines for videoconferencing-based telemental health. Consultado: 15/03/2020. Disponible en: http:// www.americantelemed.org/files/public/standards/PracticeGuidelinesforVideoconferencingBased%20TelementalHealth.pdf
BALL, C. Y PUFFETT, A. 1998. The assessment of cognitive function in the elderly using videoconferencing. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare 4(1): 36-38.
BECK, L. H.; BRANDSOME, E. D.; MIRSKY JR., A. F.; ROSVOLD, H. E. I. Y SARASON, I. 1956. A continuous performance test of brain damage. Journal of Consulting Psychology 20(5): 343-50. doi: 10.1037/h0043220.
BOAKE, C. 2002. From the Binet-Simon to the Wechsler-Bellevue: Tracing the history of intelligence testing. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 24: 383–405. doi:10.1076/jcen.24.3.383.981.
BROWNDYKE, J. N. 2005. Ethical challenges with the use of information technology and telecommunications in neuropsychology. Part I. A casebook of ethical challenges in neuropsychology. 179-189.
BUSH, S.; NAUGLE, R. Y JOHNSON-GREENE, D. 2002. Interface of information technology and neuropsychology: Ethical issues and recommendations. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 16(4): 536-547.
CERNICH, A.; BRENNANA, D. M.; STEEGE, L. Y BLEIBERG, J. 2007. Sources of error in computerized neuropsychological assessment. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 22(1): 39-48. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2006.10.004.
CLEMENT, P. F.; BROOKS, F. R.; DEAN, B. Y GALAZ, A. 2001. A neuropsychology telemedicine clinic. Military medicine 166(5): 382-384.
COHEN, J.; PENNEY, D. L.; DAVIS, R.; LIBON, D. J.; SWENSON, R. A.; AJILORE, O. 2014. Digital clock drawing: Differentiating “thinking” versus “doing” in younger and older adults with depression. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 20: 920–928. doi:10.1017/s1355617714000757.
COLLINS, F. S. Y RILEY, W. T. 2016. NIH's transformative opportunities for the behavioral and social sciences. Science Translational Medicine 8: 366ed314.
CULLUM, C. M.; WEINER, M. F.; GEHRMANN, H. R. Y HYNAN, L. S. 2006. Feasibility of telecognitive assessment in dementia 13(4): 385-90. doi: 10.1177/1073191106289065.
CULLUM, C. M.; HYNAN, L. S.; GROSCH, M.; PARIKH, M. Y WEINER, M. F. 2014. Teleneuropsychology: Evidence for Video Teleconference-Based Neuropsychological Assessment. Journal of International Neuropsychological Society 20(10): 1028–1033. doi: 10.1017/S1355617714000873.
FRATTI, S.; BOWDEN, S. C. & COOK, M. J. 2017. Reliability and validity of the CogState computerized battery in patients with seizure disorders and healthy young adults: Comparison with standard neuropsychological tests. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 31: 569–586. doi:10.1080/13854046.2016.1256435.
FELLOWS, R. P.; DAHMEN, J.; COOK, D. Y SCHMITTER-EDGECOMBE, M. 2017. Multicomponent analysis of a digital Trail Making Test. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 31(1): 154-167. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2016.1238510.
GEISINGER, K. F. 2000. Psychological testing at the end of the millennium: A brief historical review. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 31: 117–118.
GROSCH, M. C.; GOTTLIEB, M. C. Y CULLUM, C. M. 2011. Initial practice recommendations for teleneuropsychology. The Clinical Neuropsychology 25(7): 1119-33. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2011.609840.
HILDEBRAND, R.; CHOW, H.; WILLIAMS, C.; NELSON, M. Y WASS, P. 2004. Feasibility of neuropsychological testing of older adults via videoconference: implications for assessing the capacity for independent living. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare 10(3): 130-4. doi: 10.1258/135763304323070751.
HILTY, D. M.; LUO, J. S.; MORACHE, C.; MARCELO, D. A. Y NESBITT, T. S. 2002. Telepsychiatry: an overview for psychiatrists. CNS Drugs 16(8): 527-48. doi: 10.2165/00023210-200216080-00003.
JACOBSEN, S. E.; SPRENGER, T.; ANDERSSON, S. Y KROGSTAD, J. M. 2003. Neuropsychological assessment and telemedicine: a preliminary study examining the reliability of neuropsychology services performed via telecommunication. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 9(3): 472-8. doi: 10.1017/S1355617703930128.
KLAASSEN, B.; VAN BEIJNUM, B. J. F. & HERMENS, H. J. 2016. Usability in telemedicine systems—a literature survey. International journal of medical informatics 93: 57-69. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.06.004.
KAPLAN, E. F.; GOODGLASS, H. AND WEINTRAUB, S. 1983. The Boston Naming Test. 2nd ed. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia.
KAPLAN, E. 1988. The process approach to neuropsychological assessment. Aphasiology 2: 309–311. doi:10.1080/02687038808248930.
KANE, R. L. Y KAY, G. G. 1992. Computerized assessment in neuropsychology: A review of tests and test batteries. Neuropsychology Review 3(1): 1–117.
LEE, D.; JEONG, D.; SCHINDLER, R. C. Y SHORT, E. 2016. SIG-Blocks: Tangible game technology for automated cognitive assessment. Computers in Human Behavior 65(December): 163-175. doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.023
LEURENT, C. Y EHLERS, M. D. 2015. Digital technologies for cognitive assessment to accelerate drug development in Alzheimer's disease. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 98: 475–476. doi:10.1002/cpt.212.
LOH, P. K.; RAMESH, S.; MAHER, J.; SALIGARI, L.; FLICKER, L. Y GOLDSWAIN, P. 2004. Can patients with dementia be assessed at a distance? The use of telehealth and standardized assessments. Internal Medicine Journal 34: 239–242.
LUXTON, D. D.; PRUITT, L. D. & OSENBACH, J. E. 2014. Best practices for remote psychological assessment via telehealth technologies. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 45(1): 27–35. doi.org/10.1037/a0034547.
MENON, V.; ADLEMAN, N. E.; WHITE, C. D.; GLOBER, G. H. Y REISS, A. L. 2001. Error-related brain activation during a Go/NoGo response inhibition tase. Human Brain Mapping 12(3): 131-143.
MEIER, M. J. 1992. Modern clinical neuropsychology in historical perspective. American Psychologist 47: 550–558. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.47.4.550.
MYERS, K. & TURVEY, C. L. (Eds.). 2013. Elsevier insights. Telemental health: Clinical, technical, and administrative foundations for evidence-based practice. Elsevier.
MONTANI, C.; BILLAUD, N.; TYRRELL, J.; FLUCHAIRE, I.; MALTERRE, C.; LAUVERNAY, N. 1997. Psychological impact of a remote psychometric consultation with hospitalized elderly people. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare 3(3): 140-145.
POON, P.; HUI, E.; DAI, D.; KWOK, T. Y WOO, J. 2005. Cognitive intervention for community-dwelling older persons with memory problems: Telemedicine versus face-to-face treatment. International Journal of Geratric Psychiatry 20: 285–286.
RABIN, L. A.; SPADACCINI, A. T.; BRODALE, D. L.; GRANT, K. S.; ELBULOK-CHARCAPE, M. M. Y BARR, W. B. 2014. Utilization rates of computerized tests and test batteries among clinical neuropsychologists in the United States and Canada. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 45(5): 368–377. doi.org/10.1037/a0037987
RABIN, L. A.; PAOLILLO, E. Y BARR, W. V. 2016. Stability in Test-Usage Practices of Clinical Neuropsychologists in the United States and Canada Over a 10-Year Period: A Follow-Up Survey of INS and NAN Members. Archives in Clinical Neuropsychology 31(3): 206-30. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acw007.
SHORE, J. H. 2013. Telepsychiatry: Videoconferencing in the delivery of psychiatric care. American Journal of Psychiatry 170: 256–262.
SOKAL, M. M. 1981. The origins of the psychological corporation. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 17: 54–67.
VAN WYNSBERGHE, A. Y GASTMANS, C. 2009. Telepsychiatry and the meaning of in-person contact: a preliminary ethical appraisal. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy (4): 469-76. doi: 10.1007/s11019-009-9214-y.
VESTAL, L.; SMITH-OLINDE, L.; HICKS, G.; HUTTON, T. Y HART, J. JR. 2006. Efficacy of language assessment in Alzheimer's disease: comparing in-person examination and telemedicine. Clinical Interventions in Aging (4): 467-71. doi: 10.2147/ciia.2006.1.4.467.
WADSWORTH, H. E.; GALUSHA-GLASSCOCK, J. M.; WOMACK, K. B.; QUICENO, M.; WEINER, M. F.; HYNAN, L. S. Y CULLUM, C. M. 2016. Remote Neuropsychological Assessment in Rural American Indians with and without Cognitive Impairment. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 31(5): 420–425. doi:10.1093/arclin/acw030.
WADSWORTH, H. E.; DHIMA, K.; WOMACK, K. B.; HART, J.; WEINER, M. F.; HYNAN, L. S. Y CULLUM, C. M. 2018. Validity of Teleneuropsychological Assessment in Older Patients with Cognitive Disorders. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. doi:10.1093/arclin/acx140.
WECHSLER, D. 2008. Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. 4th ed. Pearson, San Antonio, TX.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Esta obra está bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional
La Revista Ciencia & Futuro es una revista de acceso abierto, todo el contenido está disponible gratuitamente sin cargo para el usuario o su institución. Los usuarios pueden leer, descargar, copiar, distribuir, imprimir, buscar o vincular los textos completos de los artículos, o utilizarlos para cualquier otro fin lícito, sin pedir permiso previo al editor o al autor. Todo lo anterior, de acuerdo con la definición de BOAI de acceso abierto.
Los autores que publican en esta revista están de acuerdo con los siguientes términos: Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial permite que el beneficiario de la licencia tenga el derecho de copiar, distribuir, exhibir y representar la obra y hacer obras derivadas para fines no comerciales siempre y cuando reconozca y cite la obra de la forma especificada por el autor o el licenciante. Los autores pueden establecer por separado acuerdos adicionales para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión de la obra publicada en la revista (por ejemplo, situarlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro), con un reconocimiento de su publicación inicial en esta revista. Se permite y se anima a los autores a difundir sus trabajos electrónicamente (por ejemplo, en repositorios institucionales o en su propio sitio web) antes y durante el proceso de envío, ya que puede dar lugar a intercambios productivos, así como a una citación más temprana y mayor de los trabajos publicados (Véase The Effect of Open Access) (en inglés). Lo anterior debe realizarse siempre sobre el artículo ya publicado por Ciencia & Futuro.
Los autores mantienen el control sobre la integridad de sus trabajos y el derecho a ser adecuadamente reconocidos y citados.
A los editores se les otorgan derechos no exclusivos para publicar y distribuir.
