• Users Online: 691
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home Current issue Ahead of print Search About us Editorial board Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 19  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 19-23

Assessment and comparison of the memory profile in traumatic brain injury and subarachnoid hemorrhage patients

1 Department of Clinical Neuropsychology, Neurosciences Center, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
2 Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab, India
3 Department of Biostatistics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Ashima Nehra
Room No. 718, Clinical Neuro Psychology, 7th Floor, Neurosciences Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi - 110 029
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0971-8990.143885

Rights and Permissions

Background: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (SAH) are the leading cause of death and disability in both developed and developing countries. They have significant cognitive and behavioral consequences, affecting the quality of life of both patients and their families. Aim: To compare the memory functioning of TBI and SAH and study the effect of demographics on the same through a retrospective study. Materials and Methods: A sample of 210 patients clinically diagnosed as TBI (N = 165; M = 145/F = 20) and SAH (N = 45; M = 35/F = 10) were using post graduate institute of memory scale (PGI-MS) which assesses 10 memory domains. Results: Odds Ratio (OR) was calculated by categorizing the scores as average and impaired on PGI-MS, the percentage of impaired cases of SAH were significantly less as compared to TBI (8.9% vs. 22.4%; OR = 0.34) Moreover, only two domains were found to have significant results, i.e. delayed recall and recognition. When the scores were adjusted for age, education and gender, memory impairment was found to be statistically significant in domains of remote memory (OR = O.10) recent memory (OR = 0.32), delayed recall (OR = 0.26), immediate memory (OR = 0.30), new learning ability (OR = 0.38), and recognition (OR = 0.17). Conclusion: A primary prevention (awareness program about risk factors) and tertiary prevention (holistic rehabilitation) would play a crucial role in improving the quality of life of both patients as well as the population at risk.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded341    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal