2004 Workshops
|
General Information Reitan Neuropsychology Laboratories offers intensive Basic Training and Advanced Workshops to provide instruction in the administration, scoring, theory, and interpretation of the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Batteries. Knowledge of neuroanatomy and neuropathology is of fundamental importance to profit fully from the Basic Training and Advanced Workshops. In order to utilize the workshop time most effectively we will presume that each participant has attained such knowledge prior to attending a workshop. We strongly recommend that two books be read prior to attending a workshop: Neuroanatomy and Neuropathology: A Clinical Guide for Neuropsychologists (Reitan & Wolfson, 1992) (limited quantity available) and The Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery: Theory and Clinical Interpretation (Reitan & Wolfson, 1993). Each workshop participant will receive a study manual prepared by Dr. Reitan for the workshop. These manuals – which can be obtained only by attending a workshop – contain carefully selected study material and case interpretations. Eligibility The Reitan and Associates workshops are open to the following persons:
Site and Accommodations The 2004 Reitan and Associates workshops will be held at the San Marcos Resort and Conference Center in Phoenix (Chandler), Arizona. The San Marcos has agreed to provide attendees to the Reitan Workshops a discounted room rate of $108 (single) and $119 (double). To take advantage of these special discount hotel rates and guarantee a room during the conference, reservations must be made by September 6, 2004. After this date our room block will be released to the public and rooms can be reserved only on a space-available basis. Complete hotel information will be sent to subscribed registrants along with their registration confirmation packets. The San Marcos Resort is accessible to persons with disabilities. If you need any special accommodations, please notify Reitan Labs describing your specific requirements. Additional information about the San Marcos Resort can be found at their website: www.SanMarcosResort.com. Registration Fees
The registration fee includes all course materials and handouts and a continental breakfast and refreshment breaks each day. In addition, workshop attendees are invited to attend a buffet dinner hosted by Dr. Wolfson at her home on Saturday, October 2, 2004. Payment Policy Full payment must accompany a completed Workshop Application. Payment may be made by check, money order, or credit card (visa or mastercard). We regret that we cannot reserve space at a workshop until we have received the full workshop fee and the completed application. Purchase orders will be accepted only from pre-approved institutions. The fee for processing purchase orders for workshops is $25. Cancellation Policy Requests for refunds must be received in writing and are subject to a $40 administrative fee. Full refunds, less the service charge, will be made if the request is postmarked by September 13, 2004. No refunds will be made for cancellations postmarked after September 14, but the registration fee may be applied to a future workshop. If a workshop has to be canceled by Reitan and Associates for any reason, all registration fees will be immediately refunded. In such cases, Reitan and Associates’ liability is limited to registration fees only; there will be no reimbursement for travel or hotel cancellation fees or penalties. CE Credit The Basic Training Workshop and the Advanced Master Series Workshop are each approved for 18 hours of CE credit by the American Psychological Association. The Reitan Neuropsychology Labs workshops are co-sponsored by The Neuropsychology Center, which is approved by the American Psychological Association to offer continuing education for psychologists. The APA Approved Sponsor maintains responsibility for the program. Certificates of Attendance will be mailed to attendees after the workshops. Description of Workshops Basic Training Workshop for Adults – September 27, 28, 29, 2004 This intensive 3-day workshop is intended to provide the fundamental training necessary to begin administering and interpreting the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery for Adults. No prior experience with the Battery is assumed; however, prior familiarity with the Battery is helpful. Each participant will receive a study manual written by Dr. Reitan for this workshop. Topics in the Basic Training Workshop for Adults include:
Advanced Masters Series Workshop -- October 1, 2, 3, 2004
Learning
Disabilities: A Neuropsychological Perspective Description This presentation will deal with the following: � A neuropsychological definition of learning disabilities (LD)
Note: An up-to-date summary of these issues, including case studies and in-depth treatment considerations, is contained in Rourke, van der Vlugt, and Rourke (2002). Suggested Readings Drummond, CR, Ahmad, SA, & Rourke, BP. (in press). Rules for the classification in younger children with Nonverbal Learning Disabilities and Basic Phonological Processing Disabilities. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. Pelletier, PM, Ahmad, SA, & Rourke, BP. 2001. Classification rules for Basic Phonological Processing Disabilities and Nonverbal Learning Disabilities: Formulation and external validity. Child Neuropsychology, 7, 84-98. Rourke, BP. 1989. Nonverbal learning disabilities: The syndrome and the model. New York: Guilford Press Rourke, BP. (Ed). 1991. Neuropsychological validation of learning disability subtypes. New York: Guilford Press. Rourke, BP, & Fuerst, DR. 1991. Learning disabilities and psychosocial functioning: A neuropsychological perspective. New York: Guilford Press. Rourke, BP, & Del Dotto, JE. 1994. Learning disabilities: N neuropsychological perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rourke, BP. (Ed.) 1995. Syndrome of nonverbal learning disabilities: Neurodevelopmental manifestations. New York: Guilford Press. Rourke, BP, van der Vlugt, H, & Rourke, SB. 2002. Practice of child-clinical neuropsychology: An introduction. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger. Byron P. Rourke, FRSC Widely regarded as one of North America’s pre-eminent child clinical neuropsychologists, Byron P. Rourke is Professor of Psychology and University Professor at the University of Windsor and a member of the Faculty of Medicine, Yale University. In 1965 Professor Rourke began his career as teacher, mentor, and scholar at the University of Windsor. As founder and Head of the Clinical Neuropsychology Program, he has been instrumental n mentoring more than 50 graduates over the past four decades. The CN program has consistently produced scientist/practitioners who are held in the highest regard throughout North America. Dr. Rourke’s research into Nonverbal Learning Disorders (NLD) has had a direct, positive, and pervasive influence on clinical practice and has significantly enhanced knowledge of the field. The Rourke White Matter Hypothesis remains a “gold standard” model of neuropsychological theory to the extent that this theory includes testable hypotheses with strong neurophysiological foundations and a complete set of behavioral predictions. Dr. Rourke is co-founder/co-editor of three of the principal journals in the field of neuropsychology and has authored, co-authored, and edited fourteen books. iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Forensic
Neuropsychology: A Question of Differential Diagnosis
Description Current trends in the practice of clinical neuropsychology have shown that more and more of a practitioner's work involves forensic activities. This workshop will cover several issues important to the practice of forensic neuropsychology. A discussion of Daubert as it applies to expert testimony in neuropsychology will be presented. The concept of the “forensic question” will be discussed as it relates to differential diagnosis, clinical neuropsychological methodology, and the responsibilities of the clinical neuropsychologist in the forensic arena. Adult forensic cases using the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery will be used to systematically illustrate a process of test interpretation, integration of clinical history and neurological findings, differential diagnosis, and consideration of forensic implications. Participants will have an opportunity to review and formulate cases in a collegial case-conference format. Participants can expect to learn the application of HRB-based clinical neuropsychological information in legal situations. iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Deficits that are
Sensitive and Almost Perfectly Specific for Brain Damage or Disease
Description There are a number of deficits that are almost perfectly specific for brain damage or disease. In other words, when any of these deficits occur, you can be sure that your patient has brain damage. These deficits, when present, provide an anchor around which less specific measures (even though generally sensitive) can be organized in filling out a total picture of neuropsychological impairment. However, these highly specific deficits occur in only about one-half of brain-damaged groups. We will identify and illustrate these deficits and present cases that illustrate their usefulness in neuropsychological evaluation of individual patients. iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
The Important Role of
Conation in Neuropsychological Assessment Description Conation, or the ability to apply oneself to effective problem-solving behavior over time, is strikingly impaired in many persons with brain damage or disease, and may represent one of the most significant deficits that occur because it is not content-limited. Instead, conation is a generalized type of competence, and may well represent the reason that neuropsychological testing (based on brief tests of various abilities) often fails to reveal the patient’s deficits when faced with real-life performances (which frequently require persistent application of intellectual abilities for success). This presentation will review research results that reveal the importance of conation as a neuropsychological deficit, its pervasive significance in neuropsychological evaluation, and, for the first time, specific procedures for computing a Conation Quotient. iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
What Actually Happens
When Neuropsychological Test Scores are Transformed According to Age and
Education Norms? Description Adjusting neuropsychological test scores, according to the age and education of the client, would obviously seem to be a very useful procedure. People differ with respect to these variables, and one would expect that such differences need to be taken into account in evaluation of neuropsychological test results. This presumption, however, is based on a projected relationship of age and education to neuropsychological test scores, and recent research results have shown that when brain damage is present, neuropsychological tests appear to be more affected by brain damage (which they were designed and validated to measure) than to age and education. Thus, age and education adjustments, based on normal controls, may not be applicable to persons with brain damage. Despite this obvious concern, there has been very little study of the actual effects of age and education in neuropsychological evaluations. We have done several studies evaluating the effects of age and education transformations of raw scores on neuropsychological test results in control groups and brain-damaged groups. In brief, the results show that the effect is to translate indications of impairment among brain-damaged persons into scores that fall in the normal range. These findings have important implications for both clinical and forensic applications, about which practicing neuropsychologists should be informed. iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Do Highly Intelligent
Persons Also Show Equivalent Scores on Neuropsychological Tests?
Or Are Their Brains Not That Much Better Than the Average Person? Description What are the relationships of IQ scores to neuropsychological test scores among normal controls of varying intelligence and educational levels? These questions have raised considerable interest among neuropsychologists, but definitive, empirical data have not been available to answer them. Obviously, persons with high intelligence are presumed to be superior in many respects to persons with significantly less intelligence, but persons with less intelligence may – and probably do– have perfectly normal brains. What does high intelligence actually mean with respect to brain-behavior abilities? We have performed empirical studies of performances on intelligence tests and neuropsychological tests of PhD’s and MD’s as compared to performances of normally-functioning and hospitalized groups (also with no past or present evidence of brain damage or disease), and these results will be presented. We believe that our data are directly relevant to the above questions and, on the basis of the groups compared, provide unequivocal answers. Discussion and debate following the presentation will be encouraged. iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Progressive Test
Administration as a Method for Justification of Comprehensive
Neuropsychological Testing
Description In this day of managed care, outcome research has received a great deal of emphasis, particularly as a basis for justifying clinical practices and procedures. This concern applies as much to comprehensive neuropsychological testing as to other clinical services. None of us wants to incur costs for testing that are not justified, but we are equally concerned that fairly extensive testing be done when needed. A problem we have is that the only bases we have for recommending comprehensive testing rest upon the history, referring information, prior diagnostic procedures, and the client’s complaints, etc., and such information varies from client to client, requiring us to form a clinical impression. Of course, this impression may be well supported in some cases, but not in others. An attempt to solve this problem has been made using screening procedures, but these procedures have never been very successful, not least because the protean manifestations of brain damage or dysfunction cannot be captured successfully in a brief examination. Our experience over the years suggested a possible answer – progressive testing. The first phase would be represented by a broad screening test that could be administered in only a few minutes, but that would serve to identify all of the likely candidates for comprehensive testing, even though a number of people were initially included who would not need full testing. Persons who did not pass Phase 1 would be tested in Phase 2, which should also be brief, taking not more than 30 to 35 minutes. The tests used in Phase 2, added to the test used in Phase 1, were intended to serve as a basis for identifying those persons for whom comprehensive testing would be recommended. In the validation studies of this plan, the test results of Phase 1, Phase 2, and the two Phases combined were evaluated using the actual outcome of comprehensive testing. Thus, all persons included in the study not only had been given Phase 1 and Phase 2 tests, but a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment as well. Thus, it was possible to evaluate the necessity of Phase 1 and 2 testing with respect to the final outcome. This plan has been worked out in total for adults and older children, but data analyses are not yet quite complete for younger children. The results were very impressive. In less than one hour of testing (Phase 1 and Phase 2), cutoff scores were determined that permitted nearly perfect identification of persons who showed versus those who did not show significant neuropsychological deficits on comprehensive testing. Of course, a firm criterion was needed with respect to the results of comprehensive testing, and this was provided by the General Neuropsychological Deficit Scale, which is based on the entire range of test scores included in the Halstead-Reitan Batteries. Cross-validation is needed of the cutoff scores for Phases 1 and 2, with relation to their accuracy in predicting outcome with the total battery, and this is currently underway. At this point, however, it appears to be possible to identify, with a high level of accuracy, those clients who will show significant deficits on comprehensive neuropsychological testing. This is the first study that has evaluated the results of brief preliminary testing as a predictor of outcome using an extensive test battery. The tests included in Phases 1 and 2 were selected not only as brief procedures of known sensitivity to brain impairment, but also with respect to providing information with relation to the nature of deficits. However, brief testing can never hope to provide an adequate assessment of overall neuropsychological functions, considering the range and complexity of brain-behavior relationships. The findings to be presented, however, indicate that brief preliminary testing, done in stages, can provide results that identify persons who need comprehensive testing. The presentation will include:
|
The following Workshop Application can be printed
from a PDF file.
Click here
to download the application.
|
FOR A PRINTER FRIENDLY PAGE CLICK
HERE AND Workshop Application
Basic Training Workshop for Adults – September 27, 28, 29, 2004
Advanced Master Series Workshop – October 1, 2, 3, 2004
Special Discount Registration
Textbooks
Total Amount Due ............................................. $ Please print your name exactly as you want it to appear on your Certificate(s) of Attendance. Name ______________________________________________________________________ Address ____________________________________________________________________ City/State (Province)/ZIP _______________________________________________________ Work Phone ____________________________ Home Phone ________________________ Fax _____________________________ Email ____________________________________ Discipline/Specialty ___________________________________________________________ Highest Degree/Year/Institution__________________________________________________ □ Check or money order enclosed □ Charge to my visa/mastercard Number ____________________________________ Expiration _____________________Signature __________________________________________________________________ Mail completed application with payment to:
Registrants who are paying with a credit card may elect to fax their completed applications to:
|