Montreal Cognitive Assessment as Screening Measure for Mild and Major Neurocognitive Disorder in a Chilean Population.

IF 1.4 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra Pub Date : 2020-10-14 eCollection Date: 2020-09-01 DOI:10.1159/000506280
Sebastian Bello-Lepe, María Francisca Alonso-Sánchez, Alonso Ortega, Marcelo Gaete, Marcela Veliz, Juan Lira, Claudia Paz Perez Salas
{"title":"Montreal Cognitive Assessment as Screening Measure for Mild and Major Neurocognitive Disorder in a Chilean Population.","authors":"Sebastian Bello-Lepe,&nbsp;María Francisca Alonso-Sánchez,&nbsp;Alonso Ortega,&nbsp;Marcelo Gaete,&nbsp;Marcela Veliz,&nbsp;Juan Lira,&nbsp;Claudia Paz Perez Salas","doi":"10.1159/000506280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a sensitive screening instrument for mild neurocognitive disorder (mild NCD). However, cut-off scores and accuracy indices should be established using representative samples of the population. In this context, the aim of this study was to update the normative values, and diagnostic efficiency statistics of the MoCA to detect mild NCD in the Chilean population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included 226 participants from the north, center, and south of the country, classified into 3 groups: healthy elderly (HE; <i>n</i> = 113), mild NCD (<i>n</i> = 65), and major neurocognitive disorder (major NCD; <i>n</i> = 48).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The optimal cut-off score to discriminate mild NCD from HE participants was 20 points with a sensitivity of 82.8% and a specificity of 84.1%. The observed balance between sensitivity and specificity shows a good test performance either to confirm or discard a diagnosis. The cut-off between mild NCD and major NCD from HE participants was 19 points with 85.6% of sensitivity and 90.3% of specificity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall diagnostic accuracy can be considered as outstanding (AUC ≥0.904) when discriminating HE from both mild NCD and major NCD. These results showed that the MoCA is a suitable tool to identify mild NCD and major NCD.</p>","PeriodicalId":38017,"journal":{"name":"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000506280","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000506280","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Background: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a sensitive screening instrument for mild neurocognitive disorder (mild NCD). However, cut-off scores and accuracy indices should be established using representative samples of the population. In this context, the aim of this study was to update the normative values, and diagnostic efficiency statistics of the MoCA to detect mild NCD in the Chilean population.

Methods: This study included 226 participants from the north, center, and south of the country, classified into 3 groups: healthy elderly (HE; n = 113), mild NCD (n = 65), and major neurocognitive disorder (major NCD; n = 48).

Results: The optimal cut-off score to discriminate mild NCD from HE participants was 20 points with a sensitivity of 82.8% and a specificity of 84.1%. The observed balance between sensitivity and specificity shows a good test performance either to confirm or discard a diagnosis. The cut-off between mild NCD and major NCD from HE participants was 19 points with 85.6% of sensitivity and 90.3% of specificity.

Conclusion: Overall diagnostic accuracy can be considered as outstanding (AUC ≥0.904) when discriminating HE from both mild NCD and major NCD. These results showed that the MoCA is a suitable tool to identify mild NCD and major NCD.

Abstract Image

蒙特利尔认知评估作为智利人群轻度和重度神经认知障碍的筛查措施。
背景:蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)是一种敏感的轻度神经认知障碍(mild neurocognitive disorder, NCD)筛查工具。但是,应该使用具有代表性的总体样本来建立截止分数和准确性指标。在此背景下,本研究的目的是更新智利MoCA检测轻度非传染性疾病的规范性值和诊断效率统计数据。方法:本研究纳入226名来自全国北部、中部和南部的参与者,分为3组:健康老年人(HE;n = 113),轻度NCD (n = 65)和重度神经认知障碍(重度NCD;N = 48)。结果:区分轻度非传染性疾病和HE参与者的最佳临界值为20分,敏感性为82.8%,特异性为84.1%。观察到的敏感性和特异性之间的平衡表明,无论是确认诊断还是放弃诊断,测试性能都很好。HE参与者轻度非传染性疾病和重度非传染性疾病之间的临界值为19分,敏感性为85.6%,特异性为90.3%。结论:无论是轻度非传染性疾病还是重度非传染性疾病,HE的总体诊断准确率均可被认为是优秀的(AUC≥0.904)。这些结果表明,MoCA是鉴定轻度非传染性疾病和重度非传染性疾病的合适工具。
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
Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra
Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: This open access and online-only journal publishes original articles covering the entire spectrum of cognitive dysfunction such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s chorea and other neurodegenerative diseases. The journal draws from diverse related research disciplines such as psychogeriatrics, neuropsychology, clinical neurology, morphology, physiology, genetic molecular biology, pathology, biochemistry, immunology, pharmacology and pharmaceutics. Strong emphasis is placed on the publication of research findings from animal studies which are complemented by clinical and therapeutic experience to give an overall appreciation of the field. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra provides additional contents based on reviewed and accepted submissions to the main journal Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra .
×
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