Clinical decision making in response to performance validity test failure in a psychiatric setting.

This study examined the clinical utility of a performance validity test (PVT) for screening consecutive referrals (N = 436) to a neuropsychology service at a state psychiatric hospital treating both civilly committed and forensic patients. We created a contingency table with Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) pass/fail (355/81) and secondary gain present/absent (181/255) to examine pass rates associated with patient demographic, clinical and forensic status characteristics. Of the 81 failed PVTs, 48 had secondary gain defined as active criminal legal charges; 33 failed PVTs with no secondary gain. These individuals tended to be older, female, Caucasian, and civilly committed compared with the group with secondary gain who failed. From estimations of TOMM False Positive Rate and True Positive Rate we estimated base rates of neurocognitive malingering for our clinical population using the Test Validation Summary (TVS; Frederick & Bowden, 2009 ). Although PVT failure is clearly more common in a group with secondary gain (31%), there were a number of false positives (11%). Clinical ratings of patients without gain who failed suggested cognitive deficits, behavioral issues, and inattention. Low scores on PVTs in the absence of secondary gain provide useful information on test engagement and can inform clinical decisions about testing.

360 Degree advocacy: a model for high impact advocacy in a rapidly changing healthcare marketplace.

In an era of rapid changes in the healthcare marketplace the specialty of clinical neuropsychology faces a substantial increase in advocacy challenges. These include maintaining both access to services and a favorable practice climate as new healthcare structures and payment models evolve. The issue of regional variability complicates an effective response to these challenges from national professional organizations. One response to the challenge of regional variability is to strengthen our national organizations' capacity to engage in coordinated and effective advocacy, and to partner with state and regional neuro/psychological associations. The Inter-Organizational Practice Committee (IOPC) was formed in 2012 to meet this need. The IOPC has developed a model of 360 Degree Advocacy that coordinates local, regional, and national resources for high-impact, efficient advocacy. This paper describes the 360 Degree Advocacy model, and walks readers through an example of the model in action, successfully responding to a threat to patient access and practice climate with a regional Medicare carrier.