Ann Rehabil Med.  2013 Apr;37(2):263-268. 10.5535/arm.2013.37.2.263.

The Assessment of Reliability of Cognitive Evoked Potential in Normal Person

• Hong JS
• Lee JH
• Yoon YH
• Choi JH
• Shin JE
• Kim SM
• Park YG

• KMID: 2165780
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5535/arm.2013.37.2.263

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
To evaluate intra-tester reliability of P300 more precisely, this study was designed. Event-related potential (ERP) is the result of endogenous brain response following cognitive stimulus. The P300 component of the human ERP is a positive wave with a latency of 300 ms or greater. Our purpose of this study was to estimate reliability of P300 latency and amplitude with 30 normal persons without head injury, as well as to set up them as the reference values in the event that they would be found to be highly reliable.
METHODS
ERP was performed at three separate times on 30 normal adults in their 20s and 30s. We measured P300 latency and amplitude among ERP.
RESULTS
P300 latency show excellent reliability with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.81. As to P300 amplitude, reliability was good to fair with ICC of 0.53. Average value of P300 latency was 311.3+/-37.0 ms, shorter than reference value of previous study in Korea.
CONCLUSION
P300 latency revealed higher reliability than P300 amplitude, although reliability of P300 was confirmed in both component. After further study including precise mechanism, influence factor on measurement and method standardization, it is expected to be an objective indicator to assess the cognitive state and predict prognosis.

Keyword

Event-related potentials; P300 component; Reliability

MeSH Terms

Adult
Brain
Craniocerebral Trauma
Event-Related Potentials, P300
Evoked Potentials
Humans
Prognosis
Reference Values

Reference

1. Pfefferbaum A, Ford JM, Wenegrat BG, Roth WT, Kopell BS. Clinical application of the P3 component of event-related potentials. I. Normal aging. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1984; 59:85–103. PMID: 6200311.

2. Goodin DS, Squires KC, Starr A. Long latency event-related components of the auditory evoked potential in dementia. Brain. 1978; 101:635–648. PMID: 737523.

3. Diner BC, Holcomb PJ, Dykman RA. P300 in major depressive disorder. Psychiatry Res. 1985; 15:175–184. PMID: 3862153.

4. Pfefferbaum A, Wenegrat BG, Ford JM, Roth WT, Kopell BS. Clinical application of the P3 component of event-related potentials. II. Dementia, depression and schizophrenia. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1984; 59:104–124. PMID: 6200305.

5. Porjesz B, Begleiter H, Samuelly I. Cognitive deficits in chronic alcoholics and elderly subjects assessed by evoked brain potentials. Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl. 1980; 286:15–29. PMID: 6935918.

6. Olbrich HM, Nau HE, Lodemann E, Zerbin D, Schmit-Neuerburg KP. Evoked potential assessment of mental function during recovery from severe head injury. Surg Neurol. 1986; 26:112–118. PMID: 3726736.

7. Olbrich HM, Nau HE, Zerbin D, Lanczos L, Lodemann E, Engelmeier MP, et al. Clinical application of event related potentials in patients with brain tumours and traumatic head injuries. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1986; 80:116–122. PMID: 3716890.

8. Papanicolaou AC, Levin HS, Eisenberg HM, Moore BD, Goethe KE, High WM Jr. Evoked potential correlates of posttraumatic amnesia after closed head injury. Neurosurgery. 1984; 14:676–678. PMID: 6462402.

9. Johnson R Jr. A triarchic model of P300 amplitude. Psychophysiology. 1986; 23:367–384. PMID: 3774922.

10. Segalowitz SJ, Barnes KL. The reliability of ERP components in the auditory oddball paradigm. Psychophysiology. 1993; 30:451–459. PMID: 8416071.

11. Hall MH, Schulze K, Rijsdijk F, Picchioni M, Ettinger U, Bramon E, et al. Heritability and reliability of P300, P50 and duration mismatch negativity. Behav Genet. 2006; 36:845–857. PMID: 16826459.

12. Polich J. Normal variation of P300 from auditory stimuli. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1986; 65:236–240. PMID: 2420577.

13. Kim HD, Kim GK, Lim YJ, Kim TS, Rhee BA, Leem W. Normal value of cognitive evoked potentials in Koreans. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 1997; 26:1190–1196.

14. Knight RT, Hillyard SA, Woods DL, Neville HJ. The effects of frontal and temporal-parietal lesions on the auditory evoked potential in man. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1980; 50:112–124. PMID: 6159179.

15. Hodo DW. Kaplan and Sadock's synopsis of psychiatry: behavioral sciences clinical psychiatry. JAMA. 1996; 275:883–884.

16. Lee YH, Park JM, Lee JM, Kim SH, Kim KW, Kang SJ, et al. Correlation between P300 latency and cognitive capacity screening examination in patients with brain lesion. J Korean Acad Rehabil Med. 2000; 24:836–841.

17. Secrest L. Bellack AS, Hersen M, editors. Reliability and validity. Research methods in clinical psychology. 1984. 2nd ed. New York: Pergamon;p. 24–54.

18. Segalowitz SJ, Ogilvie RD, Simons IA. Horne J, editor. An ERP state measure of arousal based on behavioral criteria. Sleep '90: proceedings of the tenth European Congress on Sleep Research. 1990. Bochum: Pontenagel Press;p. 23–25.

19. Goodin DS, Squires KC, Henderson BH, Starr A. Age-related variations in evoked potentials to auditory stimuli in normal human subjects. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1978; 44:447–458. PMID: 76553.