Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Mini-Mental State Examination are both valid cognitive tools in stroke.
Saved in:
| Title: | Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Mini-Mental State Examination are both valid cognitive tools in stroke. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Cumming, T. B., Churilov, L., Linden, T., Bernhardt, J. |
| Source: | Acta Neurologica Scandinavica. Aug2013, Vol. 128 Issue 2, p122-129. 8p. |
| Subjects: | Mild cognitive impairment, Mini-Mental State Examination, Stroke, Neuropsychology, Hemorrhage |
| Abstract: | Objective To determine the validity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment ( Mo CA) and the Mini- Mental State Examination ( MMSE) as screening tools for cognitive impairment after stroke. Materials and methods Cognitive assessments were administered over 2 sessions (1 week apart) at 3 months post-stroke. Scores on the Mo CA and MMSE were evaluated against a diagnosis of cognitive impairment derived from a comprehensive neuropsychological battery (the criterion standard). Results Sixty patients participated in the study [mean age 72.1 years ( SD = 13.9), mean education 10.5 years ( SD = 3.9), median acute NIHSS score 5 ( IQR 3-7)]. The Mo CA yielded lower scores (median = 21, IQR = 17-24; mean = 20.0, SD = 5.4) than the MMSE (median = 26, IQR = 22-27; mean = 24.2, SD = 4.5). MMSE data were more skewed towards ceiling than Mo CA data (skewness = −1.09 vs −0.73). Area under the receiver operator curve was higher for Mo CA than for MMSE (0.87 vs 0.84), although this difference was not significant (χ2 = 0.48, P = 0.49). At their optimal cut-offs, the Mo CA had better sensitivity than the MMSE (0.92 vs 0.82) but poorer specificity (0.67 vs 0.76). Conclusions The Mo CA is a valid screening tool for post-stroke cognitive impairment; it is more sensitive but less specific than the MMSE. Contrary to the prevailing view, the MMSE also exhibited acceptable validity in this setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Acta Neurologica Scandinavica is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Objective To determine the validity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment ( Mo CA) and the Mini- Mental State Examination ( MMSE) as screening tools for cognitive impairment after stroke. Materials and methods Cognitive assessments were administered over 2 sessions (1 week apart) at 3 months post-stroke. Scores on the Mo CA and MMSE were evaluated against a diagnosis of cognitive impairment derived from a comprehensive neuropsychological battery (the criterion standard). Results Sixty patients participated in the study [mean age 72.1 years ( SD = 13.9), mean education 10.5 years ( SD = 3.9), median acute NIHSS score 5 ( IQR 3-7)]. The Mo CA yielded lower scores (median = 21, IQR = 17-24; mean = 20.0, SD = 5.4) than the MMSE (median = 26, IQR = 22-27; mean = 24.2, SD = 4.5). MMSE data were more skewed towards ceiling than Mo CA data (skewness = −1.09 vs −0.73). Area under the receiver operator curve was higher for Mo CA than for MMSE (0.87 vs 0.84), although this difference was not significant (χ2 = 0.48, P = 0.49). At their optimal cut-offs, the Mo CA had better sensitivity than the MMSE (0.92 vs 0.82) but poorer specificity (0.67 vs 0.76). Conclusions The Mo CA is a valid screening tool for post-stroke cognitive impairment; it is more sensitive but less specific than the MMSE. Contrary to the prevailing view, the MMSE also exhibited acceptable validity in this setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00016314 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/ane.12084 |
