Comparing Performance Across In-person and Videoconference-Based Administrations of Common Neuropsychological Measures in Community-Based Survivors of Stroke.

OBJECTIVE Neuropsychological assessment via videoconference could assist in bridging service access gaps due to geographical, mobility, or infection control barriers. We aimed to compare performances on neuropsychological measures across in-person and videoconference-based administrations in community-based survivors of stroke. METHOD Participants were recruited through a stroke-specific database and community advertising. Stroke survivors were eligible if they had no upcoming neuropsychological assessment, concurrent neurological and/or major psychiatric diagnoses, and/or sensory, motor, or language impairment that would preclude standardised assessment. Thirteen neuropsychological measures were administered in-person and via videoconference in a randomised crossover design (2-week interval). Videoconference calls were established between two laptop computers, facilitated by Zoom. Repeated-measures t tests, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and Bland-Altman plots were used to compare performance across conditions. RESULTS Forty-eight participants (26 men; Mage = 64.6, SD = 10.1; Mtime since stroke = 5.2 years, SD = 4.0) completed both sessions on average 15.8 (SD = 9.7) days apart. For most measures, the participants did not perform systematically better in a particular condition, indicating agreement between administration methods. However, on the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test - Revised, participants performed poorer in the videoconference condition (Total Recall Mdifference = -2.11). ICC estimates ranged from .40 to .96 across measures. CONCLUSIONS This study provides preliminary evidence that in-person and videoconference assessment result in comparable scores for most neuropsychological tests evaluated in mildly impaired community-based survivors of stroke. This preliminary evidence supports teleneuropsychological assessment to address service gaps in stroke rehabilitation; however, further research is needed in more diverse stroke samples.