The Role of the Quantitative EEG in the Diagnosis and Rehabilitation of the Traumatic Brain Injured Patients


AA data case #

MC as TBI

MC as N

VA data case #

MC as TBI

MC as N

L data case #

MC as TBI

MC as N

RS data case #

MC as TBI

MC as N

1
 
X

 8
 
X

16
 
X

24
 
X

2
 
X

 9
 
X

17
 
X

25
 
X

3
 
X

10

X
 
18
 
X

26

X
 
4
 
X

11

X
 
19
 
X

27

X
 
5
 
X

12

X
 
20
 
X

28

X
 
6
 
X

13

X
 
21

X
 
29

X
 
7

X
 
14

X
 
22

X
 
30

X
   
15

X
 
23

X
    
1

6
 
6

2
 
3

5
 
5

2

TBI-84a
  
TBI-91a
   
TBI-88a
 
TBI-76a
  
N-57a
  
N-45a
   
N-55a
 
N-43a
  

MC misclassified, TBI traumatic brain injured, N normal, AA auditory attention data, VA visual attention data, L listen to paragraphs, RS reading silently

aSample size number in the groups



There was a range of 119–143 subjects involved in the different conditions. If the decision regarding a TBI or normal requires that the classification (normal or TBI patient) be obtained in two of the three tasks, then the combined discriminant does not make any misclassifications. This result indicates a correct TBI and normal hit rate of 100 %, thus no false positives and no false negatives. This approach was developed on individuals who had experienced a TBI some 12 days to 30 years prior to the evaluation and is thus useful in determining if someone had a TBI within this time frame.

The second discriminant function method undertaken was to discern if the SCC data by itself is sufficient to result in 100 % accuracy. The data presently available to the author was examined with this problem in mind. The following summary Table 20.2 presents the results for the discriminant function analysis employing only the frontal SCC and phase values employed in the previously presented analysis. The EC data showed the highest error rates with 21 misclassifications and thus was not included in this analysis.


Table 20.2
Individual SCC analysis of TBI vs. normal discriminant analysis across four different activation conditions







































































































































































































































































































AA data case #

MC as TBI

MC as N

VA data case #

MC as TBI

MC as N

Listen data case #

MC as TBI

MC as N

RS data case #

MC as TBI

MC as N

1 R
 
X

38
 
X

44
 
X

55
 
X

31
 
X

39
 
X

45
 
X

56
 
X

2 R
 
X

8 R
 
X

16 R
 
X
     

8 R
 
X

40
 
X

17 R
 
X
     

32
 
X

41
 
X

46
 
X
     

6 R
 
X

9 R
 
X

18 R
 
X
     

33 R
 
X

42
 
X

47
 
X
     
         
20 R
 
X
     
         
48
 
X
     

34

X
 
10 R

X
 
49

X
 
28 R

X
 

28 R

X
 
43

X
 
50

X
 
57

X
 

10 R

X
 
21 R

X
 
7 R

X
 
58

X
 

11 R

X
 
11 R

X
 
51

X
 
59

X
 

35

X
 
21 R

X
 
52

X
 
60

X
 

36

X
 
22 R

X
 
53

X
       

37

X
 
12 R

X
 
23 R

X
       

15 R

X
 
13 R

X
 
54

X
       
   
14 R

X
             

Total misclassifications

8

7
 
9

7
 
8

9
 
5

2

TBI-89a
   
TBI-89a
   
TBI-89a
   
TBI-73a
   

Normal-52a
   
N-48a
   
N-54a

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Oct 16, 2016 | Posted by in SPORT MEDICINE | Comments Off on The Role of the Quantitative EEG in the Diagnosis and Rehabilitation of the Traumatic Brain Injured Patients

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access