- Sep 2, 2000
- Reaction score
Suppose, you've been following a patient for a few years. They came in with memory complaints. You assessed them with a full current battery at that point. You see that the scores are a little low in a nomethetic comparison, but still within reasonable expectation. No functional decline is reported. They come in again, scores are a little worse in some areas a little better in others, still no functional decline. You've compared them against themselves. New tests come out. Your patient comes back. Do you switch to new assessment tools in which case all you have is nomothetic assessment, or do you stick with the older tools? I think, depending on the patient, I stick with the older tools (taking into account new data on practice effects as a diagnostic tool, etc. . .).
Based on my training, I think it would depend on whether there was a significant functional decline reported since the previous assessment and the domains of function that the pt has historically struggled with and how well they could be assessed using other instruments in the battery as you will need to eventually complete a re-assessment with the new tool. Will new subtests provide a better assessment in areas of conern? I would also want to be consistent with versions of other Wechsler assessment tools used (WAIS-III with WMS-III vs WAIS-IV and WMS-IV). Finally, given that the WAIS-IV does have a reduced administration time (does it really?, I only gave a few WAIS-IV batteries before shifting over to more therapy and briefer assessments), what role might cognitive fatigue of a longer assessment play in deciding the battery. Anyway, I can see a case for the WAIS-III for reassessment, limits testing, etc.
At this point though, it seems as if it would be iffy for forensic evaluations given that the WAIS-IV is hitting the four year mark.
EDIT: D'oh, just realized that was an old comment.