These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Evaluation of memory in acquired brain injury: a comparison between the Wechsler Memory Scale and the Rivermead Behaviour Memory Test].
    Author: Guinea-Hidalgo A, Luna-Lario P, Tirapu-Ustárroz J.
    Journal: Rev Neurol; ; 49(5):240-7. PubMed ID: 19714554.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: Learning processes and memory are frequently compromised in acquired brain injury (ABI), while at the same time such involvement is often heterogeneous and a source of deficits in other cognitive capacities and significant functional limitations. A good neuropsychological evaluation of memory is designed to study not only the type, intensity and nature of the problems, but also the way they manifest in daily life. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study examines the correlation between a traditional memory test, the Wechsler Memory Scale-III (WMS-III), and a memory test that is considered to be functional, the Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test (RBMT), in a sample of 60 patients with ABI. RESULTS: All the correlations that were observed were moderate. Greater correlations were found among the verbal memory subtests than among the visual memory tests. An important number of subjects with below-normal scalar scores on the WMS-III correctly performed (either fully or partially) the corresponding test in the RBMT. CONCLUSIONS: The joint use of the WMS-III and RBMT in evaluation can provide a more comprehensive analysis of the memory deficits and their rehabilitation. The lower scores obtained in the WMS-III compared to those of the RBMT indicate greater sensitivity of the former. Nevertheless, further testing needs to be carried out in the future to compare the performance in the tests after the patients and those around them have subjectively assessed their functional limitations. This would make it possible to determine which of the two tests offers the best balance between sensitivity and specificity, as well as a higher predictive value.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]