4.2 Article

The neuropsychological profile of vascular cognitive impairment - no dementia: comparisons to patients at risk for cerebrovascular disease and vascular dementia

Journal

ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY
Volume 19, Issue 6, Pages 745-757

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.acn.2003.09.008

Keywords

dementia; vascular dementia; cerebrovascular disease; cardiovascular disease; cognitive impairment-no dementia (CIND); neuropsychological assessment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Hachinski and co-workers have used the term vascular cognitive impairment-no dementia (VaCIND) to represent the earliest stages of cognitive decline associated with vascular changes [Neurology 57 (4) (2001) 714]. However, the neuropsychological profile of vascular CIND remains unclear. Twenty-five healthy elders, 29 individuals at risk for cerebrovascular disease (R-CVD), 18 individuals with VaCIND, and 26 individuals with vascular dementia (VaD) were examined to determine whether patterns of neuropsychological assessment performance can assist in the differentiation of patients at varying levels of risk and severity for cerebrovascular disease and VaD. The R-CVD group performed within normal expectations on most cognitive measures as compared to the elderly control sample and published clinical norms. Relative to elderly controls, the VaCIND group demonstrated significant difficulties on measures of cognitive flexibility, verbal retrieval, and verbal recognition memory, but not on measures of confrontational naming or verbal fluency. The VaD group was impaired on all cognitive measures assessed. The current findings suggest that poor cognitive flexibility and verbal retrieval in the context of preserved function in other domains may characterize the prodromal stage of VaD. (C) 2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of National Academy of Neuropsychology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available