Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scores Do Not Associate With Communication Challenges Reported by Adults With Alzheimer's Disease or Parkinson's Disease.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Faith Stagge, Alyssa M Lanzi, Anna K Saylor, Matthew L Cohen
{"title":"Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scores Do Not Associate With Communication Challenges Reported by Adults With Alzheimer's Disease or Parkinson's Disease.","authors":"Faith Stagge, Alyssa M Lanzi, Anna K Saylor, Matthew L Cohen","doi":"10.1044/2024_AJSLP-23-00248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purposes: </strong>Screening for cognitive-communication challenges in people with Alzheimer's disease (AD) or Parkinson's disease (PD) may benefit from multiple kinds of information about the client (e.g., patient-reported, performance-based). The purposes of this report are (a) to describe, using recently published score range descriptors (e.g., \"mild,\" \"moderate\"), the patient-reported communication challenges of people with AD or PD using the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) and the Aphasia Communication Outcome Measure (ACOM); and (b) to examine the relationships between the performance-based Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a cognitive screener, and patient-reported CPIB and ACOM scores.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Participants were a convenience sample of 49 community-dwelling adults with AD or PD. Participants completed the measures in person as part of a larger assessment battery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>MoCA total scores ranged from 7 to 28. CPIB T-scores fell in the following ranges: 31% were \"within normal limits,\" 57% reflected \"mildly\" restricted participation, and 12% reflected \"moderately\" restricted participation. ACOM T-scores fell in the following ranges: 50% were either \"within normal limits\" or reflected \"mild\" impairment, 29% reflected \"mild-moderately\" impaired functional communication, and 21% reflected \"moderately\" impaired functional communication. There were only weak and nonsignificant correlations between T-scores on the ACOM or CPIB and scores on the MoCA, and there were no group differences on the ACOM or CPIB between individuals who screened positive versus negative on the MoCA.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When screening individuals with AD or PD, patient-reported communication challenges seem to be complementary to information provided by the MoCA and perhaps most useful in screening for mild communication challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":49240,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_AJSLP-23-00248","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purposes: Screening for cognitive-communication challenges in people with Alzheimer's disease (AD) or Parkinson's disease (PD) may benefit from multiple kinds of information about the client (e.g., patient-reported, performance-based). The purposes of this report are (a) to describe, using recently published score range descriptors (e.g., "mild," "moderate"), the patient-reported communication challenges of people with AD or PD using the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) and the Aphasia Communication Outcome Measure (ACOM); and (b) to examine the relationships between the performance-based Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a cognitive screener, and patient-reported CPIB and ACOM scores.

Method: Participants were a convenience sample of 49 community-dwelling adults with AD or PD. Participants completed the measures in person as part of a larger assessment battery.

Results: MoCA total scores ranged from 7 to 28. CPIB T-scores fell in the following ranges: 31% were "within normal limits," 57% reflected "mildly" restricted participation, and 12% reflected "moderately" restricted participation. ACOM T-scores fell in the following ranges: 50% were either "within normal limits" or reflected "mild" impairment, 29% reflected "mild-moderately" impaired functional communication, and 21% reflected "moderately" impaired functional communication. There were only weak and nonsignificant correlations between T-scores on the ACOM or CPIB and scores on the MoCA, and there were no group differences on the ACOM or CPIB between individuals who screened positive versus negative on the MoCA.

Conclusion: When screening individuals with AD or PD, patient-reported communication challenges seem to be complementary to information provided by the MoCA and perhaps most useful in screening for mild communication challenges.

蒙特利尔认知评估得分与阿尔茨海默氏症或帕金森氏症患者报告的交流障碍无关。
目的:筛查阿尔茨海默病(AD)或帕金森病(PD)患者的认知-交流障碍可能会受益于客户的多种信息(如患者报告、基于表现的信息)。本报告的目的是:(a)使用最近公布的分数范围描述(如 "轻度"、"中度"),使用交流参与项目库(CPIB)和失语症交流结果测量(ACOM)描述患者报告的 AD 或 PD 患者的交流障碍;(b)研究基于表现的蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)(一种认知筛选器)与患者报告的 CPIB 和 ACOM 分数之间的关系:受试者为49名居住在社区的成人注意力缺失症(AD)或帕金森氏症(PD)患者。结果:MoCA总分介于0至5分之间,而认知筛查器总分介于5至10分之间:MoCA总分从7分到28分不等。CPIB T 分数在以下范围内:31%为 "正常范围内",57%为 "轻度 "参与受限,12%为 "中度 "参与受限。ACOM T 分数的范围如下:50%的人 "在正常范围内 "或反映出 "轻度 "功能障碍,29%的人反映出 "轻度-中度 "功能交流障碍,21%的人反映出 "中度 "功能交流障碍。ACOM或CPIB的T分与MoCA的得分之间仅存在微弱且不显著的相关性,而且MoCA筛查结果为阳性和阴性的患者在ACOM或CPIB上没有群体差异:结论:在筛查注意力缺失症或帕金森氏症患者时,患者报告的交流障碍似乎是对MoCA所提供信息的补充,也许对筛查轻度交流障碍最有用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
11.50%
发文量
353
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Mission: AJSLP publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles on all aspects of clinical practice in speech-language pathology. The journal is an international outlet for clinical research pertaining to screening, detection, diagnosis, management, and outcomes of communication and swallowing disorders across the lifespan as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. Because of its clinical orientation, the journal disseminates research findings applicable to diverse aspects of clinical practice in speech-language pathology. AJSLP seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work. Scope: The broad field of speech-language pathology, including aphasia; apraxia of speech and childhood apraxia of speech; aural rehabilitation; augmentative and alternative communication; cognitive impairment; craniofacial disorders; dysarthria; fluency disorders; language disorders in children; speech sound disorders; swallowing, dysphagia, and feeding disorders; and voice disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信