4.2 Article

Evaluation of a Summary Score of Cognitive Performance for Use in Trials in Perioperative and Critical Care

Journal

DEMENTIA AND GERIATRIC COGNITIVE DISORDERS
Volume 31, Issue 6, Pages 451-459

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000329442

Keywords

Cognitive testing; Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease; Neuropsychological tests; Postoperative cognitive dysfunction; Practice effects

Funding

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [32003B-121956]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background/Aims: Cognitive dysfunction after medical treatment is increasingly being recognized. Studies on this topic require repeated cognitive testing within a short time. However, with repeated testing, practice effects must be expected. We quantified practice effects in a demographically corrected summary score of a neuropsychological test battery repeatedly administered to healthy elderly volunteers. Methods: The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD) Neuropsychological Assessment Battery (for which a demographically corrected summary score was developed), phonemic fluency tests, and trail-making tests were administered in healthy volunteers aged 65 years or older on days 0, 7, and 90. This battery allows calculation of a demographically adjusted continuous summary score. Results: Significant practice effects were observed in the CERAD total score and in the word list (learning and recall) subtest. Based on these volunteer data, we developed a threshold for diagnosis of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) with the CERAD total score. Conclusion: Practice effects with repeated administration of neuropsychological tests must be accounted for in the interpretation of such tests. Ignoring practice effects may lead to an underestimation of POCD. The usefulness of the proposed demographically adjusted continuous score for cognitive function will have to be tested prospectively in patients. Copyright (C) 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel

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