Ecological Validity of the Multiple Errands Test (MET) on Discharge from Neurorehabilitation Hospital

Abstract

The purpose of this prospective study was to examine the predictive and ecological validity of the Multiple Errands Test (MET) on discharge from neurorehabilitation hospital to the community. The specific objective was to examine the relationships between discharge MET scores and follow-up scores on the Participation Index (M2PI). The study sample included 30 participants with acquired brain injury who were independent in basic activities of daily living 1 week prior to discharge from a neurorehabilitation unit. The MET Hospital-Version was administered at discharge and the M2PI was administered to participants and their caregivers during a home visit 3 months after discharge. Moderate significant correlations were found between the MET and the M2PI scores (self and caregiver MET total error score with total M2PI r = .403, r = .510), with a greater correlation coefficient for caregiver ratings than for self ratings. Partial correlation analysis demonstrated the stability of this relationship while controlling for basic cognitive status scores. The results provide supporting evidence for the ecological validity of the MET at discharge from neurorehabilitation. In addition, the findings highlight the need for community-based rehabilitation that will reduce the impact of executive function deficits on participation in daily life.

Keywords

executive functions multitasking community participation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alderman

Burgess

P. W.

Knight

, & Henman

(2003). Ecological validity of a simplified version of the multiple errands shopping test. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 9, 31–44.

Anderson

Jacobs

, & Anderson

P. J.

(2008). Executive functions and the frontal lobes: A lifespan perspective. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Baum

C. M.

Connor

L. T.

Morrison

Hahn

Dromerick

A. W.

, & Edwards

D. F.

(2008). Reliability, validity and clinical utility of the Executive Function Performance Test: A measure of executive function in a sample of people with stroke. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 446–455.

Baum

C. M.

Morrison

Hahn

, & Edwards

(2003). Executive Function Performance Test: Test Protocol Booklet. St. Louis: Washington University School of Medicine.

Burgess

P. W.

Alderman

Frobes

Costello

Coates

L. M.

Dawson

D. R.

(2006). The case for the development and use of “ecologically valid” measures of executive function in experimental and clinical neuropsychology. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 12, 194–209.

Chaytor

Schmitter-Edgecombe

, & Burr

(2006). Improving the ecological validity of executive functioning assessment. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 21, 217–227.

Corrigan

J. D.

Smith-Knapp

, & Granger

C. V.

(1997). Validity of the functional independence measure for persons with traumatic brain injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 78, 828–834.

Davidoff

G. N.

Roth

E. J.

Haughton

J. S.

, & Gardner

M. S.

(1990). Cognitive dysfunction in spinal cord injury patients: Sensitivity of the Functional Independence Measure subscales vs. neuropsychological assessment. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 71, 326–329.

Dawson

D. R.

Anderson

Burgess

P. W.

Levine

Rewilak

Cooper

(2005a, February). The ecological validity of the Multiple Errands Test—Hospital Version: Preliminary findings. Poster presented at meeting of the International Neuropsychological Society, St. Louis, Missouri.

10.

Dawson

D. R.

Anderson

N. D.

Burgess

Levine

Rewilak

Cooper

(2005b, February). Naturalistic assessment of executive function: The Multiple Errands Test. Presentation at the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.

11.

Dawson

D. R.

Anderson

N. D.

Burgess

Cooper

Krpan

K.M.

, & Stuss

D. T.

(2009). Further development of the Multiple Errands Test: Standardized scoring, reliability, and ecological validity for the Baycrest version. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 90, S41–S51.

12.

Elliott

(2003). Executive functions and their disorders: Imaging in clinical neuroscience. British Medical Bulletin, 65, 49–59.

13.

Erez

A. B.

Rothschild

Katz

Tuchner

, & Hartman-Maeir

(2009). Executive functioning, awareness and participation in daily life after mild traumatic brain injury: A preliminary study. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 63, 634–640.

14.

Evans

J. J.

Chua

S. E.

McKenna

P. J.

, & Wilson

B. A.

(1997). Assessment of the dysexecutive syndrome in schizophrenia. Psychological Medicine, 27, 635–646.

15.

Fleming

(2009). Self-report. In: Stone

J. H.

& Blouin

(Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Rehabilitation. Available online: http://cirrie.buffalo.edu/encyclopedia/article.php?id=30&language=en.

16.

Gioia

G. G.

Isquith

P. K.

, & Kenealy

L. E.

(2008). Assessment of behavioral aspects of executive function. In: Anderson

Jacobs

, & Anderson

P. J.

(Eds.), Executive functions and the frontal lobes: A life span perspective (pp. 179–202). New York: Taylor & Francis.

17.

Godefroy

(2003). Frontal syndrome and disorders of executive functions. Journal of Neurology, 250, 1–6.

18.

Granger

C. V.

(1998). The emerging science of functional assessment: Our tool for outcomes analysis. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 79, 235–240.

19.

Granger

C. V.

Cotter

A. C.

Hamilton

B. B.

, & Fiedler

R. C.

(1993). Functional assessment scales: A study of persons after stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 74, 133–138.

20.

Granger

C. V.

Markello

S. J.

Graham

J. E.

Deutsch

, & Ottenbacher

K. J.

(2009). The uniform data system for medical rehabilitation: Report of patients with stroke discharged from comprehensive medical programs in 2000–2007. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 88, 961–972.

21.

Hart

Seignourel

P. J.

, & Sherer

(2009). A longitudinal study of awareness of deficit after moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 19, 161–176.

22.

Katz

, & Hartman-Maeir

(2005). Higher-level cognitive functions: Awareness and executive functions enabling engagement in occupation. In: Katz

(Ed.), Cognition and occupation across the life span: Models for intervention in occupational therapy (2nd ed., pp. xiii–xv). Bethesda, MD: AOTA Press.

23.

Knight

Alderman

, & Burgess

P. W.

(2002). Development of a simplified version of the Multiple Errands Test for use in hospital settings. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 12, 231–255.

24.

Levav

Averbuch

, & Katz

(2005, July). Validity of the Multiple Errands Test Simplified Version (MET-SV): A functional measure of executive functions within brain injured adults. Paper presented at the World Federation of Occupational Therapy, Sydney, Australia.

25.

Lezak

M. D.

Howieson

D. B.

Loring

D. W.

Hannay

H. J.

, & Fischer

J. S.

(2004). Neuropsychological Assessment, 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

26.

Malec

J. F.

(2004a). The Mayo-Portland participation Index: A brief and psychometrically sound measure of brain injury outcome. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 85, 1989–1996.

27.

Malec

J. F.

(2004b). Comparability of Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory ratings by staff, significant others and people with acquired brain injury. Brain Injury, 18, 563–575.

28.

Malec

J. F.

(2005). The Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory. The Center for Outcome Measurement in Brain Injury. Retrieved May 27, 2009, from http://www.tbims.org/combi/mpai.

29.

Malec

J. F.

Kragness

Evans

R. W.

Finlay

K. L.

Kent

, & Lezak

M. D.

(2003). Further psychometric evaluation and revision of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory in a national sample. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 18, 479–492.

30.

Malec

J. F.

Moessner

A. M.

Kragness

, & Lezak

M. D.

(2000). Refining a measure of brain injury sequelae to predict postacute rehabilitation outcome: Rating scale analysis of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 15, 670–682.

31.

Odhuba

R. A.

van den Broek

M. D.

, & Johns

L. C.

(2005). Ecological validity of measures of executive functioning. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 269–278.

32.

Ones

Yilmaz

Cetinkaya

, & Caglar

(2005). Quality of life for patients poststroke and the factors affecting it. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Disease, 14, 261–266.

33.

Onsworth

, & Fleming

(2005). The relative importance of metacognitive skills, emotional status, and executive function in psychosocial adjustment following acquired brain injury. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 20, 315–332.

34.

Ownsworth

, & Shum

(2008). Relationship between executive functions and productivity outcomes following stroke. Disability and Rehabilitation, 30, 531–540.

35.

Prigatano

G. P.

(2005). Disturbances of self-awareness and rehabilitation of patients with traumatic brain injury: A 20-year perspective. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabiitation, 20, 19–29.

36.

Rand

Basha-Abu

Rukan S.

Weiss

P. L.

, & Katz

(2009). Validation of the Virtual MET as an assessment tool for executive functions. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 19, 583–602.

37.

Roth

R. M.

Isquith

P. K.

, & Gioia

G. A.

(2005). Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function: Adult version. In: Lutz

F. L.

, (Ed.), Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc. SPSS Version 15.0; Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.

38.

Schwartz

M. F.

Buxbaum

L. J.

Ferraro

Veramonti

, & Segal

(2003). The Naturalistic Action Test. Bury St. Edmunds, United Kingdom: Thames Valley Test Company.

39.

Schwartz

M. F.

Segal

Veramonti

Ferraro

, & Buxbaum

L. J.

(2002). The Naturalistic Action Test: A standardized assessment for everyday action impairment. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 12, 311–399.

40.

Shallice

, & Burgess

P. W.

(1991). Deficits in strategy application following frontal lobe damage in man. Brain, 114, 727–741.

41.

Sohlberg

M. M.

, & Mateer

C. A.

(2001). Cognitive rehabilitation, an integrative neuropsychological approach (pp. 230–262). New York: The Guilford Press.

42.

Tranel

Hathaway-Nepple

, & Anderson

S. W.

(2007). Impaired behaviour on real-world tasks following damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 29, 319–332.

43.

Turner

B. J.

Fleming

J. M.

Ownsworth

T. L.

, & Cornwell

P. L.

(2008). The transition from hospital to home for individuals with acquired brain injury: A literature review and research recommendations. Disability and Rehabilitation, 30, 1153–1176.

44.

Wilson

B. A.

Alderman

Burgess

P. W.

Emslie

, & Evans

J. J.

(1996). Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome (BADS). Bury St. Edmunds, UK: Thames Valley Test Company.

45.

Wilson

B. A.

, & Evans

(2008). Models for the rehabilitation of executive impairments. In: Anderson

Jacobs

Anderson

P. J.

(Eds.), Executive functions and the frontal lobes (pp. 385–407). New York: Taylor & Francis.

46.

World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Retrieved January 10, 2010, from http://www3.who.int/icf/introse/ICF-Eng-Intro.pdf

47.

Zwecker

Levenkrohn

Fleisig

Zeilig

Ohry

, & Adunsky

(2002). Mini-Mental State Examination, cognitive FIM instrument, and the Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment: Relation to functional outcome of stroke patients. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 83, 342–345.