Cognitive complaints in patients after whiplash injury: the impact of malingering.

B Schmand, J Lindeboom, S Schagen, R Heijt, T Koene, H L Hamburger
Author Information
  1. B Schmand: Department of Psychology, Slotervaartziekenhuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. b.schmand@amc.uva.nl

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The validity of memory and concentration complaints that are often reported after a whiplash trauma is controversial. The prevalence of malingering or underperformance in post-whiplash patients, and its impact on their cognitive test results were studied.
METHODS: The Amsterdam short term memory (ASTM) test, a recently developed malingering test, was used as well as a series of conventional memory and concentration tests. The study sample was a highly selected group of patients, who were examined either as part of a litigation procedure (n=36) or in the normal routine of an outpatient clinic (n=72).
RESULTS: The prevalence of underperformance, as defined by a positive score on the malingering test, was 61% (95% CI: 45-77) in the context of litigation, and 29% (95% CI: 18-40) in the outpatient clinic (p=0.003). Furthermore, the scores on the memory and concentration test of malingering post-whiplash patients (n=43) and non-malingering post-whiplash patients (n=65) were compared with the scores of patients with closed head injury (n=20) and normal controls (n=46). The malingering post-whiplash patients scored as low as the patients with closed head injury on most tests.
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of malingering or cognitive underperformance in late post-whiplash patients is substantial, particularly in litigation contexts. It is not warranted to explain the mild cognitive disorders of whiplash patients in terms of brain damage, as some authors have done. The cognitive complaints of non-malingering post-whiplash patients are more likely a result of chronic pain, chronic fatigue, or depression.

References

  1. Soc Sci Med. 1985;20(5):517-27 [PMID: 3992293]
  2. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1997 Feb;19(1):43-51 [PMID: 9071640]
  3. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1990 Oct;12(5):715-28 [PMID: 2258433]
  4. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 1990 Spring;2(2):202-13 [PMID: 2136077]
  5. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1992 Oct;55(10):943-8 [PMID: 1431958]
  6. Arch Neurol. 1993 Jan;50(1):87-91 [PMID: 8418806]
  7. Neurology. 1994 Nov;44(11):1993-7 [PMID: 7969948]
  8. Acta Neurol Scand. 1995 May;91(5):346-52 [PMID: 7639063]
  9. Medicine (Baltimore). 1995 Sep;74(5):281-97 [PMID: 7565068]
  10. Eur J Nucl Med. 1996 Jan;23(1):72-4 [PMID: 8586106]
  11. Am J Psychiatry. 1996 Jan;153(1):7-10 [PMID: 8540596]
  12. Lancet. 1996 May 4;347(9010):1207-11 [PMID: 8622449]
  13. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1996 May;60(5):474-7 [PMID: 8778249]
  14. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996 Feb 1;21(3):392-7 [PMID: 8742220]
  15. Neuropsychol Rev. 1995 Jun;5(2):125-48 [PMID: 8719024]
  16. Acta Neurol Scand. 1997 Feb;95(2):73-80 [PMID: 9059724]
  17. Acta Neurol Scand. 1989 Dec;80(6):584-8 [PMID: 2618586]

MeSH Term

Adult
Bias
Case-Control Studies
Craniocerebral Trauma
Female
Humans
Male
Malingering
Memory Disorders
Neuropsychological Tests
Prevalence
Reproducibility of Results
Whiplash Injuries

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0patientsmalingeringpost-whiplashtestmemorycognitiveconcentrationcomplaintswhiplashprevalenceunderperformancelitigationimpacttestsnormaloutpatientclinic95%CI:scoresnon-malingeringclosedheadinjurychronicOBJECTIVES:validityoftenreportedtraumacontroversialresultsstudiedMETHODS:AmsterdamshorttermASTMrecentlydevelopedusedwellseriesconventionalstudysamplehighlyselectedgroupexaminedeitherpartproceduren=36routinen=72RESULTS:definedpositivescore61%45-77context29%18-40p=0003Furthermoren=43n=65comparedn=20controlsn=46scoredlowCONCLUSIONS:latesubstantialparticularlycontextswarrantedexplainmilddisorderstermsbraindamageauthorsdonelikelyresultpainfatiguedepressionCognitiveinjury:

Similar Articles

Cited By