ICU幸存者抑制性控制的侧卫任务评估:对认知障碍的初步认识。

IF 2.3 3区 心理学 Q2 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Li-Tsung Lin , Hui-An Lin , Chyi-Huey Bai , Sheng-Feng Lin
{"title":"ICU幸存者抑制性控制的侧卫任务评估:对认知障碍的初步认识。","authors":"Li-Tsung Lin ,&nbsp;Hui-An Lin ,&nbsp;Chyi-Huey Bai ,&nbsp;Sheng-Feng Lin","doi":"10.1016/j.bbr.2025.115791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><div>Cognitive assessment tools for ICU survivors often lack sensitivity to detect subtle impairments. This study examines whether combining standard screening instruments with computerized inhibitory control measures enhances post-ICU cognitive evaluation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In this prospective cohort study conducted at a university-affiliated hospital, participants included ICU survivors aged ≥ 40 years, functionally independent prior to admission, and alert upon ICU discharge. Assessments included the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and a computerized Flanker task evaluating response accuracy and reaction time. The Stroop task was used to validate agreement with the Flanker task.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Among 34 participants, median MMSE and MoCA scores were 25.5 and 24, respectively. Cognitive scores ≥ 25 were observed in 55.9 % (MMSE) and 44.1 % (MoCA). Participants in the highest MoCA tertile (&gt;26) demonstrated preserved attention and inhibitory control. MoCA scores were more strongly associated with Flanker task accuracy than MMSE, particularly in the combined condition (adjusted β = 2.7 per MoCA point, p = 0.026; β = 27.2 for MoCA ≥ 25 vs &lt;25, p = 0.026) versus MMSE (adjusted β = 2.8 per point, p = 0.044; β = 20.6 for MMSE ≥ 25 vs &lt;25, p = 0.074). Bland–Altman analysis indicated strong agreement between Flanker and Stroop task accuracy in high-performing individuals.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Integrating the Flanker task with MoCA may offer a more nuanced assessment of post-ICU cognitive function. This combined approach enhances detection of cognitive deficits and supports early intervention strategies in ICU recovery care.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8823,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Brain Research","volume":"495 ","pages":"Article 115791"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Flanker task assessment of inhibitory control in ICU survivors: Preliminary insights into cognitive impairment\",\"authors\":\"Li-Tsung Lin ,&nbsp;Hui-An Lin ,&nbsp;Chyi-Huey Bai ,&nbsp;Sheng-Feng Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bbr.2025.115791\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><div>Cognitive assessment tools for ICU survivors often lack sensitivity to detect subtle impairments. This study examines whether combining standard screening instruments with computerized inhibitory control measures enhances post-ICU cognitive evaluation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In this prospective cohort study conducted at a university-affiliated hospital, participants included ICU survivors aged ≥ 40 years, functionally independent prior to admission, and alert upon ICU discharge. Assessments included the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and a computerized Flanker task evaluating response accuracy and reaction time. The Stroop task was used to validate agreement with the Flanker task.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Among 34 participants, median MMSE and MoCA scores were 25.5 and 24, respectively. Cognitive scores ≥ 25 were observed in 55.9 % (MMSE) and 44.1 % (MoCA). Participants in the highest MoCA tertile (&gt;26) demonstrated preserved attention and inhibitory control. MoCA scores were more strongly associated with Flanker task accuracy than MMSE, particularly in the combined condition (adjusted β = 2.7 per MoCA point, p = 0.026; β = 27.2 for MoCA ≥ 25 vs &lt;25, p = 0.026) versus MMSE (adjusted β = 2.8 per point, p = 0.044; β = 20.6 for MMSE ≥ 25 vs &lt;25, p = 0.074). Bland–Altman analysis indicated strong agreement between Flanker and Stroop task accuracy in high-performing individuals.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Integrating the Flanker task with MoCA may offer a more nuanced assessment of post-ICU cognitive function. This combined approach enhances detection of cognitive deficits and supports early intervention strategies in ICU recovery care.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8823,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavioural Brain Research\",\"volume\":\"495 \",\"pages\":\"Article 115791\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavioural Brain Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016643282500378X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioural Brain Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016643282500378X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:ICU幸存者的认知评估工具往往缺乏检测细微损伤的敏感性。本研究探讨标准筛查仪器与计算机化抑制控制措施相结合是否能提高icu后的认知评估。方法:在一所大学附属医院进行的前瞻性队列研究中,参与者包括年龄≥40岁、入院前功能独立、出院时神志清醒的ICU幸存者。评估包括简易精神状态检查(MMSE)、蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)和评估反应准确性和反应时间的计算机侧卫任务。Stroop任务用于验证与Flanker任务的一致性。结果:在34名参与者中,MMSE和MoCA得分中位数分别为25.5和24。认知评分≥25分的占55.9% (MMSE)和44.1% (MoCA)。最高MoCA水平(bb0 26)的参与者表现出了注意力和抑制控制。与MMSE相比,MoCA评分与侧卫任务准确性的相关性更强,特别是在联合条件下(调整后的β = 2.7 / MoCA点,p = 0.026; MoCA≥25时β = 27.2)。结论:将侧卫任务与MoCA相结合可以更细致地评估icu后的认知功能。这种联合方法增强了对认知缺陷的检测,并支持了ICU康复护理的早期干预策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Flanker task assessment of inhibitory control in ICU survivors: Preliminary insights into cognitive impairment

Background and purpose

Cognitive assessment tools for ICU survivors often lack sensitivity to detect subtle impairments. This study examines whether combining standard screening instruments with computerized inhibitory control measures enhances post-ICU cognitive evaluation.

Methods

In this prospective cohort study conducted at a university-affiliated hospital, participants included ICU survivors aged ≥ 40 years, functionally independent prior to admission, and alert upon ICU discharge. Assessments included the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and a computerized Flanker task evaluating response accuracy and reaction time. The Stroop task was used to validate agreement with the Flanker task.

Results

Among 34 participants, median MMSE and MoCA scores were 25.5 and 24, respectively. Cognitive scores ≥ 25 were observed in 55.9 % (MMSE) and 44.1 % (MoCA). Participants in the highest MoCA tertile (>26) demonstrated preserved attention and inhibitory control. MoCA scores were more strongly associated with Flanker task accuracy than MMSE, particularly in the combined condition (adjusted β = 2.7 per MoCA point, p = 0.026; β = 27.2 for MoCA ≥ 25 vs <25, p = 0.026) versus MMSE (adjusted β = 2.8 per point, p = 0.044; β = 20.6 for MMSE ≥ 25 vs <25, p = 0.074). Bland–Altman analysis indicated strong agreement between Flanker and Stroop task accuracy in high-performing individuals.

Conclusions

Integrating the Flanker task with MoCA may offer a more nuanced assessment of post-ICU cognitive function. This combined approach enhances detection of cognitive deficits and supports early intervention strategies in ICU recovery care.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Behavioural Brain Research
Behavioural Brain Research 医学-行为科学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
383
审稿时长
61 days
期刊介绍: Behavioural Brain Research is an international, interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the publication of articles in the field of behavioural neuroscience, broadly defined. Contributions from the entire range of disciplines that comprise the neurosciences, behavioural sciences or cognitive sciences are appropriate, as long as the goal is to delineate the neural mechanisms underlying behaviour. Thus, studies may range from neurophysiological, neuroanatomical, neurochemical or neuropharmacological analysis of brain-behaviour relations, including the use of molecular genetic or behavioural genetic approaches, to studies that involve the use of brain imaging techniques, to neuroethological studies. Reports of original research, of major methodological advances, or of novel conceptual approaches are all encouraged. The journal will also consider critical reviews on selected topics.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信