 |
|
A Comparison of Alternative Methods of Screening for Dementia in Clinical Settings
Reinhild Mulligan, MD;
Andrew Mackinnon, PhD;
Anthony F. Jorm, PhD;
Panteleimon Giannakopoulos, MD;
Jean-Pierre Michel, MD
Arch Neurol. 1996;53(6):532-536.
Abstract
| |
Objective
To compare 3 approaches to screening for dementia: cognitive testing, informant report, and neurovisual assessment in a clinical environment.
Setting
A university hospital in Geneva, Switzerland.
Patients
Subjects were 76 patients admitted to the Geriatric Hospital or outpatients assessed at the Memory Clinic of the Hospitals of the University of Geneva School of Medicine in Geneva, Switzerland. Thirty-three met criteria for dementia and 11 for depression based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition, Revised.
Main Outcome Measures
Performance in French-language versions of the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, and the Clinical Antisaccadic Eye Movement Test.
Results
All tests significantly discriminated cases of dementia from noncases. The receiver operator characteristic analysis demonstrated that the Mini-Mental State Examination and the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly were more efficient screening measures for dementia than the Antisaccadic Eye Movement Test in this setting. Unlike the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly was unrelated to patients' educational attainment or premorbid intelligence. The previously reported strong relationship between the Mini-Mental State Examination and the Antisaccadic Eye Movement Test was not replicated in these patients.
Conclusions
Both cognitive testing and informant report are efficient methods of screening for dementia in clinical settings. Factors such as sensorimotor disability or informant availability may dictate the viability of each approach in individual application. The performance of the Antisaccadic Eye Movement Test precludes recommending its use as a screen for dementia without further research into its performance.
Author Affiliations
From the Departments of Geriatrics (Drs Mulligan and Michel) and Psychiatry (Dr Giannakopoulos), Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Belle-Idée, Geneva, Switzerland; Mental Health Research Institute of Victoria and Department of Psychological Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne (Dr Mackinnon), and National Health and Medical Research Council, Social Psychiatry Research Unit, Australian National University, Canberra (Dr Jorm), Australia.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Proxy screening tools improve the recognition of dementia in old-age homes: results of a validation study
Kohler et al.
Age Ageing 2007;0:afm108v1-afm108.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cognitive assessment in the elderly: a review of clinical methods
Woodford and George
QJM 2007;100:469-484.
FULL TEXT
Inhibitory functioning in Alzheimer's disease
Amieva et al.
Brain 2004;127:949-964.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Memory Testing in Dementia: How Much Is Enough?
Derrer et al.
J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 2001;14:1-6.
ABSTRACT
Combining Cognitive Testing and Informant Report to Increase Accuracy in Screening for Dementia
Mackinnon and Mulligan
Am. J. Psychiatry 1998;155:1529-1535.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
