Assessing Cognition Remotely: Expanding the Reach of Cognitive Testing for Older Adults at Risk for Dementia in a Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 1.6 Q4 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Aidan Steeves, Karla Faig, Chris McGibbon, Andrew Sexton, Pamela Jarrett
{"title":"Assessing Cognition Remotely: Expanding the Reach of Cognitive Testing for Older Adults at Risk for Dementia in a Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Aidan Steeves, Karla Faig, Chris McGibbon, Andrew Sexton, Pamela Jarrett","doi":"10.5770/cgj.28.790","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Little is known about whether cognitive assessments can be completed remotely by older adults at risk for dementia, and there is no consensus on which tool is best. The SYNchronising Exercises, Remedies in GaIt and Cognition at Home (SYNERGIC@Home) study evaluated the feasibility of a home-based, double-blind, randomized-controlled trial to improve gait and cognition in individuals at risk for dementia. This paper reports a secondary analytic outcome of the cognitive tests used. The three aims were: 1) to examine whether the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA 8.1 Audiovisual), Cognitive-Functional Composite2 (CFC2), and Telephone Cognitive Screen (T-CogS) could be administered remotely; 2) to compare each tool; 3) to evaluate changes in cognition following the intervention. Sixty participants were randomized to one of four physical/cognitive exercise intervention arms, with 52 participants completing the intervention. Cognitive tests were done in the homes of participants via Zoom for Healthcare™. All 52 participants completed the assessments. The interquartile range (IQR) for the MoCA was 4, the CFC2 was 8, and the T-CogS was 1. At baseline, 11.5% scored perfectly on the MoCA, 0% scored perfectly on the CFC2, and 62% scored perfectly on the T-CogS. Scores on the MoCA (<i>p</i>=.076), CFC2 (<i>p</i>=.053), and T-CogS (<i>p</i>=.281) were not statistically significantly different from baseline to post-intervention. This study demonstrates that these cognitive tests can be administered remotely, with the MoCA and the CFC2 being the most sensitive to variability in scores.</p>","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"87-90"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882207/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5770/cgj.28.790","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Little is known about whether cognitive assessments can be completed remotely by older adults at risk for dementia, and there is no consensus on which tool is best. The SYNchronising Exercises, Remedies in GaIt and Cognition at Home (SYNERGIC@Home) study evaluated the feasibility of a home-based, double-blind, randomized-controlled trial to improve gait and cognition in individuals at risk for dementia. This paper reports a secondary analytic outcome of the cognitive tests used. The three aims were: 1) to examine whether the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA 8.1 Audiovisual), Cognitive-Functional Composite2 (CFC2), and Telephone Cognitive Screen (T-CogS) could be administered remotely; 2) to compare each tool; 3) to evaluate changes in cognition following the intervention. Sixty participants were randomized to one of four physical/cognitive exercise intervention arms, with 52 participants completing the intervention. Cognitive tests were done in the homes of participants via Zoom for Healthcare™. All 52 participants completed the assessments. The interquartile range (IQR) for the MoCA was 4, the CFC2 was 8, and the T-CogS was 1. At baseline, 11.5% scored perfectly on the MoCA, 0% scored perfectly on the CFC2, and 62% scored perfectly on the T-CogS. Scores on the MoCA (p=.076), CFC2 (p=.053), and T-CogS (p=.281) were not statistically significantly different from baseline to post-intervention. This study demonstrates that these cognitive tests can be administered remotely, with the MoCA and the CFC2 being the most sensitive to variability in scores.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Canadian Geriatrics Journal
Canadian Geriatrics Journal Nursing-Gerontology
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Canadian Geriatrics Journal (CGJ) is a peer-reviewed publication that is a home for innovative aging research of a high quality aimed at improving the health and the care provided to older persons residing in Canada and outside our borders. While we gratefully accept submissions from researchers outside our country, we are committed to encouraging aging research by Canadians. The CGJ is targeted to family physicians with training or an interest in the care of older persons, specialists in geriatric medicine, geriatric psychiatrists, and members of other health disciplines with a focus on gerontology.
×
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