Training in Neurorehabilitation Psychology: Defining Competencies, Requisite Skill Sets, and a Proposed Developmental Pathway.

Psychologists have been applying neurorehabilitation models of care for many years. These practitioners come from different training backgrounds and use a variety of titles to refer to themselves despite considerable overlap in practice patterns, professional identification, and salary. Titles like 'neurorehabilitation psychologist' and 'rehabilitation neuropsychologist' are sometimes used by practitioners in the field to indicate their specialty area, but are not formally recognized by the American Psychological Association, the American Board of Professional Psychology, or by training councils in clinical neuropsychology (CN) or rehabilitation psychology (RP). Neither the CN or RP specialties alone fully address or define the competencies, skill sets, and clinical experiences required to provide high quality, comprehensive neurorehabilitation psychology services across settings. Therefore, irrespective of practice setting, we believe that both clinical neuropsychologists and rehabilitation psychologists should ideally have mastery of specific, overlapping competencies and a philosophical approach to care that we call neurorehabilitation psychology in this paper. Trainees and early career professionals who aspire to practice in this arena are often pressured to prioritize either CN or RP pathways over the other, with anxiety about perceived and real potential for falling short in their training goals. In the absence of an explicit training path or formal guidelines, these professionals emerge only after the opportunity, privilege, or frank luck of working with specific mentors or in exceptional patient care settings that lend themselves to obtaining integrated competencies in neurorehabilitation psychology. This paper reflects the efforts of 7 practitioners to preliminarily define the practice and philosophies of neurorehabilitation psychology, the skill sets and competencies deemed essential for best practice, and essential training pathway elements. We propose competencies designed to maximize the integrity of training and provide clear guideposts for professional development.

Rehabilitation psychology: 2020 state of the field survey.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: To date, there are no published formal surveys of the "state of the field" of Rehabilitation Psychology in terms of education, training, practice patterns, professional identity, and relative salary and income structures for those who identify as Rehabilitation Psychologists. RESEARCH METHOD/DESIGN: In an effort to gather this information, the Practice Committee of APA Division 22 (Rehabilitation Psychology) conducted a convenience-sample survey of its listserv subscribers to obtain a representation of Rehabilitation Psychologists across the United States, and a depiction of the fields in which they work. RESULTS: There were 282 respondents to the survey. Most respondents were female (69%) and worked in hospital/medical facilities (70%). Most worked in urban/suburban areas (96%), with adults (57%), and had a straight salary income structure (78%). Salary was found to be associated with age (p < .001), gender (p < .001), degree (p = .001), board certification status (p < .001), years licensed (p < .001), and Manager/Director position status (p < .001). Salary was not significantly different by region. CONCLUSIONS: Implications regarding the need for advocacy for the roles of Rehabilitation Psychology in health care, promotion of the specialty with consumers, and the development of future professionals are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Update on Third Party Observers in Neuropsychological Evaluation: An Interorganizational Position Paper.

OBJECTIVE: The National Academy of Neuropsychology (NAN), the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN), and the American College of Professional Neuropsychology (ACPN) collaborated to publish an update to their original position statements, confirming the organizations' opposition to third party observers (TPO). METHOD: A review of literature addressing TPO effects, ethical standards, professional organization position statements, test publisher policies and new telemedicine developments was completed to obtain consensus on relevant issues in TPO and recording of neuropsychological evaluations. RESULTS: TPO has been shown to impact the cognitive functions most often assessed in forensic or medicolegal settings. Third party observation, whether in person, recorded or electronically, remains a potential threat to the validity and reliability of evaluation results, and violates test security guidelines, ethical principles and standards of conduct in the field. Demands for TPO in the context of medicolegal or forensic settings have become a tactic designed to limit the ability of the consulting neuropsychologist to perform assessment and provide information to the trier of fact. CONCLUSIONS: The field of neuropsychology opposes the presence of TPO in the setting of medicolegal or forensic neuropsychological evaluations.

Update on Third Party Observers in Neuropsychological Evaluation: An Interorganizational Position Paper.

OBJECTIVE: The National Academy of Neuropsychology (NAN), the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN), and the American College of Professional Neuropsychology (ACPN) collaborated to publish an update to their original position statements, confirming the organizations' opposition to third party observer (TPO). METHOD: A review of literature addressing TPO effects, ethical standards, professional organization position statements, test publisher policies and new telemedicine developments was completed to obtain consensus on relevant issues in TPO and recording of neuropsychological evaluations. RESULTS: TPO has been shown to impact the cognitive functions most often assessed in forensic or medicolegal settings. Third party observation, whether in person, recorded or electronic, remains a potential threat to the validity and reliability of evaluation results, and violates test security guidelines, ethical principles and standards of conduct in the field. Demands for TPO in the context of medicolegal or forensic settings have become a tactic designed to limit the ability of the consulting neuropsychologist to perform assessment and provide information to the trier of fact. CONCLUSION: The field of neuropsychology opposes the presence of TPO in the setting of medicolegal or forensic neuropsychological evaluations.

InterOrganizational practice committee guidance/recommendation for models of care during the novel coronavirus pandemic.

Objective: The Inter Organizational Practice Committee (IOPC) convened a workgroup to develop guidance on models to provide neuropsychological (NP) care during the COVID-19 pandemic while minimizing risks of novel coronavirus transmission as lockdown orders are lifted and ambulatory clinical services resume.Method: A collaborative panel of experts from major professional organizations developed provisional guidance for models of neuropsychological practice during the pandemic. The stakeholders included the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology/American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology, the National Academy of Neuropsychology, Society of Clinical neuropsychology (Division 40) of the American Psychological Association, the American Board of Professional Neuropsychology, and the American Psychological Association Services, Inc.Results: This guidance reviews the risks and benefits of conducting NP exams in several ways, including standard in-person, mitigated in-person, in-clinic teleneuropsychology (TeleNP), and in-home TeleNP. Strategies are provided for selecting the most appropriate model for a given patient, taking into account four levels of patient risk stratification, level of community risk and the concept of stepped models of care. Links are provided to governmental agency and professional organization resources as well as an outline and discussion of essential infection mitigation processes based on commonalities across recommendations from diverse federal, state, local, and professional organization recommendations.Conclusion: This document provides recommendations and guidance with analysis of the risks relative to the benefits of various models of neuropsychological care during the COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations may be revised as circumstances evolve, with updates posted continuously on the IOPC website (https://iopc.online/).

Inter Organizational Practice Committee Guidance/Recommendation for Models of Care During the Novel Coronavirus Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The Inter Organizational Practice Committee (IOPC) convened a workgroup to develop guidance on models to provide neuropsychological (NP) care during the COVID-19 pandemic while minimizing risks of novel coronavirus transmission as lockdown orders are lifted and ambulatory clinical services resume. METHOD: A collaborative panel of experts from major professional organizations developed provisional guidance for models of neuropsychological practice during the pandemic. The stakeholders included the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology/American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology, the National Academy of Neuropsychology, Society of Clinical neuropsychology (Division 40) of the American Psychological Association, the American Board of Professional Neuropsychology, and the American Psychological Association Services, Inc. RESULTS: This guidance reviews the risks and benefits of conducting NP exams in several ways, including standard in-person, mitigated in-person, in-clinic teleneuropsychology (TeleNP), and in-home TeleNP. Strategies are provided for selecting the most appropriate model for a given patient, taking into account four levels of patient risk stratification, level of community risk, and the concept of stepped models of care. Links are provided to governmental agency and professional organization resources as well as an outline and discussion of essential infection mitigation processes based on commonalities across recommendations from diverse federal, state, local, and professional organization recommendations. CONCLUSION: This document provides recommendations and guidance with analysis of the risks relative to the benefits of various models of NP care during the COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations may be revised as circumstances evolve, with updates posted continuously on the IOPC website (https://iopc.online/).

Inter Organizational Practice Committee Recommendations/Guidance for Teleneuropsychology in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic†.

OBJECTIVE: The Inter Organizational Practice Committee convened a workgroup to provide rapid guidance about teleneuropsychology (TeleNP) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: A collaborative panel of experts from major professional organizations developed provisional guidance for neuropsychological practice during the pandemic. The stakeholders included the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology/American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology, the National Academy of Neuropsychology, Division 40 of the American Psychological Association, the American Board of Professional Neuropsychology, and the American Psychological Association Services, Inc. The group reviewed literature; collated federal, regional, and state regulations and information from insurers; and surveyed practitioners to identify best practices. RESULTS: Literature indicates that TeleNP may offer reliable and valid assessments, but clinicians need to consider limitations, develop new informed consent procedures, report modifications of standard procedures, and state limitations to diagnostic conclusions and recommendations. Specific limitations affect TeleNP assessments of older adults, younger children, individuals with limited access to technology, and individuals with other individual, cultural, and/or linguistic differences. TeleNP may be contraindicated or infeasible given specific patient characteristics, circumstances, and referral questions. Considerations for billing TeleNP services are offered with reservations that clinicians must verify procedures independently. Guidance about technical issues and "tips" for TeleNP procedures are provided. CONCLUSION: This document provides provisional guidance with links to resources and established guidelines for telepsychology. Specific recommendations extend these practices to TeleNP. These recommendations may be revised as circumstances evolve, with updates posted continuously at IOPC.online.

InterOrganizational practice committee recommendations/guidance for teleneuropsychology (TeleNP) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: The Inter Organizational Practice Committee (IOPC) convened a workgroup to provide rapid guidance about teleneuropsychology (TeleNP) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.Method: A collaborative panel of experts from major professional organizations developed provisional guidance for neuropsychological practice during the pandemic. The stakeholders included the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology/American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology, the National Academy of Neuropsychology, Division 40 of the American Psychological Association, the American Board of Professional Neuropsychology, and the American Psychological Association Services, Inc. The group reviewed literature, collated federal, regional and state regulations and information from insurers, and surveyed practitioners to identify best practices.Results: Literature indicates that TeleNP may offer reliable and valid assessments, but clinicians need to consider limitations, develop new informed consent procedures, report modifications of standard procedures, and state limitations to diagnostic conclusions and recommendations. Specific limitations affect TeleNP assessments of older adults, younger children, individuals with limited access to technology, and individuals with other individual, cultural, and/or linguistic differences. TeleNP may be contraindicated or infeasible given specific patient characteristics, circumstances, and referral questions. Considerations for billing TeleNP services are offered with reservations that clinicians must verify procedures independently. Guidance about technical issues and "tips" for TeleNP procedures are provided.Conclusion: This document provides provisional guidance with links to resources and established guidelines for telepsychology. Specific recommendations extend these practices to TeleNP. These recommendations may be revised as circumstances evolve, with updates posted continuously at OPC.online.

Statements of Agreement From the Targeted Evaluation and Active Management (TEAM) Approaches to Treating Concussion Meeting Held in Pittsburgh, October 15-16, 2015.

BACKGROUND: Conventional management for concussion involves prescribed rest and progressive return to activity. Recent evidence challenges this notion and suggests that active approaches may be effective for some patients. Previous concussion consensus statements provide limited guidance regarding active treatment. OBJECTIVE: To describe the current landscape of treatment for concussion and to provide summary agreements related to treatment to assist clinicians in the treatment of concussion. METHODS: On October 14 to 16, 2015, the Targeted Evaluation and Active Management (TEAM) Approaches to Treating Concussion meeting was convened in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Thirty-seven concussion experts from neuropsychology, neurology, neurosurgery, sports medicine, physical medicine and rehabilitation, physical therapy, athletic training, and research and 12 individuals representing sport, military, and public health organizations attended the meeting. The 37 experts indicated their agreement on a series of statements using an audience response system clicker device. RESULTS: A total of 16 statements of agreement were supported covering (1) Summary of the Current Approach to Treating Concussion, (2) Heterogeneity and Evolving Clinical Profiles of Concussion, (3) TEAM Approach to Concussion Treatment: Specific Strategies, and (4) Future Directions: A Call to Research. Support (ie, response of agree or somewhat agree) for the statements ranged from to 97% to 100%. CONCLUSION: Concussions are characterized by diverse symptoms and impairments and evolving clinical profiles; recovery varies on the basis of modifying factors, injury severity, and treatments. Active and targeted treatments may enhance recovery after concussion. Research is needed on concussion clinical profiles, biomarkers, and the effectiveness and timing of treatments. ABBREVIATIONS: ARS, audience response systemCDC, Centers for Disease Control and PreventionDoD, Department of DefensemTBI, mild traumatic brain injuryNCAA, National Collegiate Athletic AssociationNFL, National Football LeagueNIH, National Institutes of HealthRCT, randomized controlled trialRTP, return to playSRC, sport- and recreation-related concussionTBI, traumatic brain injuryTEAM, Targeted Evaluation and Active Management.

2015 American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN) student affairs committee survey of neuropsychology trainees.

OBJECTIVE: Surveys of practicing neuropsychologists have been conducted for years; however, there have been no comprehensive surveys of neuropsychology trainees, which may result in important issues being overlooked by the profession. This survey assessed trainees' experiences in areas such as student debt, professional development, and training satisfaction. METHOD: Survey items were written by a task force of the AACN Student Affairs Committee (SAC), and neuropsychology trainees were recruited via neuropsychology-focused listservs. In total, 344 trainees completed the survey (75% female) and included participants from every region of the US and Canada. RESULTS: Based on the survey questions, nearly half of all trainees (47%) indicated financial factors were the greatest limitation in their training. Student debt had a bimodal distribution; 32.7% had minimal debt, but 45% had debt >$100,000. In contrast, expected starting salaries were modest, but consistent with findings ($80-100,000). While almost all trainees intended to pursue board certification (97% through ABPP), many were 'not at all' or only 'somewhat' familiar with the process. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicated additional critical concerns beyond those related to debt and lack of familiarity with board certification procedures. The results will inform SAC conference programming and the profession on the current 'state of the trainees' in neuropsychology.