Compensation and malingering in traumatic brain injury: a dose-response relationship?
The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a dose-response relationship between potential monetary compensation and failure on psychological indicators of malingering in traumatic brain injury. 332 traumatic brain injury patients were divided into three groups based on incentive to perform poorly on neuropsychological testing: no incentive; limited incentive as provided by State law; high incentive as provided by Federal law. The rate of failure on five well-validated malingering indicators across these groups was examined. Cases handled under Federal workers compensation laws showed considerably higher rates of failure and diagnosable malingering than cases handled under State law. The findings indicate that monetary compensation associated with workers compensation claims is a major motive for exaggeration and malingering of problems attributed to work-related brain injuries. The clinician's index of suspicion regarding exaggeration and malingering of symptoms and deficits should be much higher in the context of Federal workers compensation claims, particularly in patients who have suffered only mild traumatic brain injury.
Bianchini
Kevin J
KJ
University of New Orleans, LA, USA.
Curtis
Kelly L
KL
Greve
Kevin W
KW
D000328:Adult; D001930:Brain Injuries / Q000150:complications / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000523:psychology; D003072:Cognition Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000209:etiology / Q000523:psychology; D004185:Disability Evaluation; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008306:Malingering / Q000175:diagnosis*; D008875:Middle Aged; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D016017:Odds Ratio; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D014942:Workers' Compensation