Cognitive correlates of HVOT performance differ between individuals with mild cognitive impairment and normal controls

Objective: To clinically characterize performance on the Hooper Visual Organization Test (HVOT) among participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and to identify naming and executive functioning correlates associated with HVOT performance among MCI participants and normal controls (NC). Background: The HVOT is a common neuropsychological instrument that measures visuospatial skills and agnosia. It has, however, been criticized for its multifactorial nature, as several studies have reported executive or language correlates of HVOT performance. To our knowledge, simultaneous comparison of executive functioning and language demands of the HVOT has never been performed among an older cohort. Methods: The HVOT, two tests of executive functioning [Trail Making Test, Part B (TMT-B), Controlled Oral Word Association (COWA)] and two tests of naming [abbreviated Boston Naming Test (BNT), Animal Naming] were administered to 222 NC, 166 MCI, and 68 Alzheimer's disease (AD) individuals. Results: HVOT scores were significantly different between all three groups in the expected direction (AD < MCI < NC). Linear regression among NC participants revealed that COWA, age, and BNT were significantly associated with HVOT scores, accounting for 12%, 6%, and 4% of HVOT variance, respectively. Among MCI participants, the BNT accounted for 43% of HVOT variance. Neither TMT-B nor Animal Naming was a significant predictor for either group. Conclusion: Among NC participants, rapid word generation (i.e., COWA), a measure of executive functioning, is the most salient predictor of HVOT performance. In contrast, lexical retrieval (i.e., BNT) is the most salient language or executive functioning predictor of HVOT performance among MCI participants. These findings extend previous claims that the HVOT is multifactorial by suggesting that reduced HVOT performance in MCI patients may be related to mild lexical retrieval impairments. (c) 2006 National Academy of Neuropsychology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.