Browsing by Author "Malec, James"

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Brain Rehabilitation, Advanced Imaging, and Neuroscience (BRAIN): An IUPUI Signature Center Initiative (SCI)
    (Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research, 2014-04-11) Hammond, Flora; Saykin, Andrew J.; Malec, James; Keiski, Michelle
    The Mission of the Indiana Center for Brain Rehabilitation, Advanced Imaging, and Neuroscience (ICBRAIN) is: to develop and disseminate techniques and methodologies for combining advanced neuroimaging, neurogenetics and other neurophysiological measures with precision behavioral measurement to evaluate novel rehabilitation interventions for people with acquired brain injury. Traumatic and other types of acquired brain injury (ABI) affect millions of U.S. citizens each year, many of whom experience persistent disabilities. Over the past decade there has been a notable rise in research activities to address serious gaps in the knowledge base of ABI, including neuroimaging, outcome measurement, and intervention studies to change function. However, brain injury researchers have not yet established solid links between these research agendas. The BRAIN SCI fills this gap in neuroscience by bringing together an interdisciplinary team of clinical researchers to (1) advance basic science and clinical knowledge to the next level of integration, (2) translate the knowledge gained directly into clinical care for improved patient outcomes, and (3) use the newly integrated knowledge to drive the leading edge of translational research. BRAIN research includes the Indiana Traumatic Brain Injury Model System, funded by the National Institute for Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), the InterFACE Center for the study of emotions and interpersonal interactions after neurologic injury, and nine other externally funded research projects. BRAIN research ranges from development of a neurogenetic respository and advanced neuroimaging studies to determine critical elements in recovery from brain injury to intervention studies to improve recovery to a multi-national study of an intervention for phantom limb pain. BRAIN research is interdisciplinary. Disciplines currently involved in BRAIN research include physiatry, neuropsychology, neuroradiology, rehabilitation science, biomedical engineering, and psychiatry. The Indiana School of Medicine Neuroscience Center of Excellence provides a home for BRAIN and supports its interdisciplinary Steering Committee. In addition to partnerships with the Neuroscience Center, the Center for Neuroimaging, and the InterFACE Center, BRAIN collaborates with the Rehabilitation Hospital of Indiana, the Stark Neuroscience Institute, and the School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences. This presentation will describe BRAIN’s mission, vision, organization, partnerships, and ongoing research projects in greater detail.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Brain Rehabilitation, Advanced Imaging, and Neuroscience (BRAIN): An IUPUI Signature Center Initiative (SCI)
    (Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research, 2015-04-17) Hammond, Flora; Saykin, Andrew J.; Malec, James
    Abstract The Mission of the Indiana Center for Brain Rehabilitation, Advanced Imaging, and Neuroscience (ICBRAIN) is: to develop and disseminate techniques and methodologies for combining advanced neuroimaging, neurogenetics and other neurophysiological measures with precision behavioral measurement to evaluate novel rehabilitation interventions for people with acquired brain injury. Traumatic and other types of acquired brain injury (ABI) affect millions of U.S. citizens each year, many of whom experience persistent disabilities. Over the past decade there has been a notable rise in research activities to address serious gaps in the knowledge base of ABI, including neuroimaging, outcome measurement, and intervention studies to change function. However, brain injury researchers have not yet established solid links between these research agendas. The BRAIN SCI fills this gap in neuroscience by bringing together an interdisciplinary team of clinical researchers to (1) advance basic science and clinical knowledge to the next level of integration, (2) translate the knowledge gained into clinical care for improved patient outcomes, and (3) use the newly integrated knowledge to drive the leading edge of translational research. BRAIN research includes the Indiana Traumatic Brain Injury Model System, funded by the National Institute for Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), the InterFACE Center for the study of emotions and interpersonal interactions after neurologic injury, and 12 externally funded research projects. BRAIN research ranges from development of a neurogenetic respository and advanced neuroimaging studies to determine critical elements in recovery from brain injury to intervention studies to improve recovery to a multi-national study of an intervention for phantom limb pain. BRAIN research is transdisciplinary. Disciplines currently involved in BRAIN research include physiatry, neuropsychology, neuroradiology, rehabilitation science, biomedical engineering, and psychiatry. The Indiana University School of Medicine Neuroscience Center provides a home for BRAIN and supports its interdisciplinary Steering Committee. In addition to partnerships with the Neuroscience Center, the Center for Neuroimaging, and the InterFACE Center, BRAIN collaborates with the Rehabilitation Hospital of Indiana, the Stark Neuroscience Institute, and the School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences. This presentation will describe BRAIN’s mission, vision, values, strategic plan, organization, partnerships, and ongoing research projects in greater detail.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Indiana Center for Brain Rehabilitation, Advanced Imaging, and Neuroscience (ICBRAIN): An IUPUI Signature Center Initiative
    (Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research, 2012-04-13) Hammond, Flora; Saykin, Andrew J.; Malec, James; Kean, Jacob; Keiski, Michelle; McDonald, Brenna; Neumann, Dawn; Wang, Yang; Yoder, Karmen
    The Mission of the Indiana Center for Brain Rehabilitation, Advanced Imaging, and Neuroscience (ICBRAIN) is: to develop and disseminate techniques and methodologies for advanced neuroimaging and precision behavioral measurement to evaluate novel rehabilitation interventions for people with acquired brain injury. Traumatic and other types of acquired brain injury (ABI) affect millions of U.S. citizens each year, many of whom experience persistent disabilities. For example, among the estimated 1.4 million civilians who sustain a traumatic brain injury (TBI) each year, 50,000 die and a minimum of 80,000 sustain injuries of sufficient severity to require extended rehabilitation. The current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have increased awareness and mobilized interest in medical treatment and rehabilitation for returning soldiers with TBI (designated as the “signature injury” of these conflicts). A 2008 study by the RAND corporation based on a random sample of 1,965 veterans estimated that, among 1.64 million returning veterans, approximately 320,000 experienced a probable TBI (19%). Over the past decade there has been a notable rise in research activities to address serious gaps in the knowledge base of ABI, including neuroimaging, outcome measurement, and intervention studies to change function. However, brain injury researchers have not yet established solid links between these research agendas. Such links are crucial for moving the evidence base forward to improve treatment outcomes. ICBRAIN will fill this gap in neuroscience by bringing together an interdisciplinary team of clinical researchers to (1) advance basic science and clinical knowledge to the next level of integration, (2) translate the knowledge gained directly into clinical care for improved patient outcomes, and (3) use the newly integrated knowledge to drive the leading edge of future research. ICBRAIN represents a unique collaboration among established clinical rehabilitation and measurement researchers in PM&R and at RHI and established researchers at the IU Center for Neuroimaging.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Investigation of a New Couples Intervention for Individuals with Brain Injury: A Randomized Controlled Trial
    (Elsevier, 2018) Backhaus, Samantha; Neumann, Dawn; Parrott, Devan; Hammond, Flora M.; Brownson, Claire; Malec, James; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine
    d to (1) examine the efficacy of a treatment to enhance a couple’s relationship after brain injury (BI) particularly in relationship satisfaction and communication; and (2) determine couples’ satisfaction with this type of intervention. Design: Randomized Wait-list Controlled (WC) Trial. Setting: Midwestern outpatient BI rehabilitation center. Intervention: The Couples CARE intervention is a 16 week, 2-hour, manualized small group treatment utilizing psychoeducation, affect recognition and empathy training, cognitive and dialectical behavioral treatments (CBT, DBT), communication skills training, and Gottman’s theoretical framework for couples. Participants: Forty-four participants (22 persons with BI and their intimate partner) were randomized by couples to the intervention or WC group, with 11 couples in each group. Main Outcome Measures: Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS); Quality of Marriage Index (QMI); 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse communication questionnaire. Measures were completed by the person with BI and their partner at 3 time points: baseline, immediate post-intervention, 3-month follow-up. Results The experimental group showed significant improvement at post-test and follow-up on the DAS and the Horsemen questionnaire compared to baseline and to the WC group which showed no significant changes on these measures. No significant effects were observed on the QMI for either group. Satisfaction scores were largely favorable. Conclusion suggest this intervention can improve couples’ dyadic adjustment and communication after BI. High satisfaction ratings suggest this small group intervention is feasible with couples following BI. Future directions for this intervention are discussed.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Social Competence Treatment after Traumatic Brain Injury: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Interactive Group Treatment versus Non-Interactive Treatment
    (Elsevier, 2018) Harrison-Felix, Cynthia; Newman, Jody K.; Hawley, Lenore; Morey, Clare; Ketchum, Jessica M.; Walker, William C.; Bell, Kathleen R.; Millis, Scott R.; Braden, Cynthia; Malec, James; Hammond, Flora M.; Eagye, C. B.; Howe, Laura; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine
    Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of a replicable group treatment program for improving social competence after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Design Multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing two methods of conducting a social competency skills program, an interactive group format versus a classroom lecture. Setting Community and Veteran rehabilitation centers. Participants 179 civilian, military, and veteran adults with TBI and social competence difficulties, at least 6 months post-injury. Experimental Intervention Thirteen weekly group interactive sessions (1.5 hours) with structured and facilitated group interactions to improve social competence. Alternative (Control) Intervention Thirteen traditional classroom sessions using the same curriculum with brief supplemental individual sessions but without structured group interaction. Primary Outcome Measure Profile of Pragmatic Impairment in Communication (PPIC), an objective behavioral rating of social communication impairments following TBI. Secondary Outcomes LaTrobe Communication Questionnaire (LCQ), Goal Attainment Scale (GAS), Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist – (PCL-C), Brief Symptom Inventory 18 (BSI-18), Scale of Perceived Social Self Efficacy (PSSE). Results Social competence goals (GAS) were achieved and maintained for most participants regardless of treatment method. Significant improvements in the primary outcome (PPIC) and two of the secondary outcomes (LCQ and BSI) were seen immediately post-treatment and at 3 months post-treatment in the AT arm only, however these improvements were not significantly different between the GIST and AT arms. Similar trends were observed for PSSE and PCL-C. Conclusions Social competence skills improved for persons with TBI in both treatment conditions. The group interactive format was not found to be a superior method of treatment delivery in this study.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Traumatic Brain Injury Surveillance and Research with Electronic Health Records: Building New Capacities
    (2023-03) McFarlane, Timothy D.; Dixon, Brian E.; Malec, James; Vest, Joshua; Wessel, Jennifer
    Between 3.2 and 5.3 million U.S. civilians live with traumatic brain injury (TBI)-related disabilities. Although the post-acute phase of TBI has been recognized as both a discrete disease process and risk factor for chronic conditions, TBI is not recognized as a chronic disease. TBI epidemiology draws upon untimely, incomplete, cross-sectional, administrative datasets. The adoption of electronic health records (EHR) may supplement traditional datasets for public health surveillance and research. Methods Indiana constructed a state-wide clinical TBI registry from longitudinal (2004-2018) EHRs. This dissertation includes three distinct studies to enhance, evaluate, and apply the registry: 1) development and evaluation of a natural language processing algorithm for identification of TBI severity within free-text notes; 2) evaluation and comparison of the performance of the ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM surveillance definitions; and 3) estimating the effect of mild TBI (mTBI) on the risk of post-acute chronic conditions compared to individuals without mTBI. Results Automated extraction of Glasgow Coma Scale from clinical notes was feasible and demonstrated balanced recall and precision (F-scores) for classification of mild (99.8%), moderate (100%), and severe (99.9%) TBI. We observed poor sensitivity for ICD-10-CM TBI surveillance compared to ICD-9-CM (0.212 and 0.601, respectively), resulting in potentially 5-fold underreporting. ICD-10-CM was not statistically equivalent to ICD-9-CM for sensitivity (𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑̂=0.389, 95% CI [0.388,0.405]) or positive predictive value (𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑̂=-0.353, 95% CI [-0.362,-0.344]). Compared to a matched cohort, individuals with mTBI were more likely to be diagnosed with mental health, substance use, neurological, cardiovascular, and endocrine conditions. Conclusion ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM surveillance definitions were not equivalent, and the transition resulted in a underreporting incidence for mTBI. This has direct implications on existing and future TBI registries and the Report to Congress on Traumatic Brain Injury in the United States. The supplementation of state-based trauma registries with structured and unstructured EHR data is effective for studying TBI outcomes. Our findings support the classification of TBI as a chronic disease by funding bodies, which may improve public funding to replace legacy systems to improve standardization, timeliness, and completeness of the epidemiology and post-acute outcomes of TBI.