Effectiveness and costs of phototest in dementia and cognitive impairment screening

Abstract

BackgroundTo assess and compare the effectiveness and costs of Phototest, Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), and Memory Impairment Screen (MIS) to screen for dementia (DEM) and cognitive impairment (CI).MethodsA phase III study was conducted over one year in consecutive patients with suspicion of CI or DEM at four Primary Care (PC) centers. After undergoing all screening tests at the PC center, participants were extensively evaluated by researchers blinded to screening test results in a Cognitive-Behavioral Neurology Unit (CBNU). The gold standard diagnosis was established by consensus of expert neurologists. Effectiveness was assessed by the proportion of correct diagnoses (diagnostic accuracy [DA]) and by the kappa index of concordance between test results and gold standard diagnoses. Costs were based on public prices and hospital accounts.ResultsThe study included 140 subjects (48 with DEM, 37 with CI without DEM, and 55 without CI). The MIS could not be applied to 23 illiterate subjects (16.4%). For DEM, the maximum effectiveness of the MMSE was obtained with different cutoff points as a function of educational level [k = 0.31 (95% Confidence interval [95%CI], 0.19-0.43), DA = 0.60 (95%CI, 0.52-0.68)], and that of the MIS with a cutoff of 3/4 [k = 0.63 (95%CI, 0.48-0.78), DA = 0.83 (95%CI, 0.80-0.92)]. Effectiveness of the Phototest [k = 0.71 (95%CI, 0.59-0.83), DA = 0.87 (95%CI, 0.80-0.92)] was similar to that of the MIS and higher than that of the MMSE. Costs were higher with MMSE (275.9 ± 193.3€ [mean ± sd euros]) than with Phototest (208.2 ± 196.8€) or MIS (201.3 ± 193.4€), whose costs did not significantly differ. For CI, the effectiveness did not significantly differ between MIS [k = 0.59 (95%CI, 0.45-0.74), DA = 0.79 (95%CI, 0.64-0.97)] and Phototest [k = 0.58 (95%CI, 0.45-0.74), DA = 0.78 (95%CI, 0.64-0.95)] and was lowest for the MMSE [k = 0.27 (95%CI, 0.09-0.45), DA = 0.69 (95%CI, 0.56-0.84)]. Costs were higher for MMSE (393.4 ± 121.8€) than for Phototest (287.0 ± 197.4€) or MIS (300.1 ± 165.6€), whose costs did not significantly differ.ConclusionMMSE is not an effective instrument in our setting. For both DEM and CI, the Phototest and MIS are more effective and less costly, with no difference between them. However, MIS could not be applied to the appreciable percentage of our population who were illiterate.

A novel language-neutral Visual Cognitive Assessment Test (VCAT): validation in four Southeast Asian countries

“…Other than the VCAT, there have been several tests, including the Eurotest, Phototest, and Memory Alteration Test, designed to overcome the influence of education and culture in screening for dementia [33][34][35]. The Eurotest was designed to assess one's cognition by evaluation of subject's ability to handle money, and has been demonstrated to be effective for subjects who have low levels of education and those who are illiterate.…”

Spot the Difference for Cognitive Decline: A quick memory and attention test for screening cognitive decline

“…Some verbal memory tests cannot be used for a population that has a low level of education. 19 Most of the verbal-based screening measures have not been validated in people with low education levels or illiterate individuals, 24,25 and it has been shown in previous studies that a low level of education can result in cognitively unimpaired people screening positive for dementia. 24 Furthermore, the SDCD test takes only approximately 2 minutes to assess short-term memory and attention functioning, in addition to its abovementioned merits.…”

The Memory Orientation Screening Test (MOST) Accurately Separates Normal from MCI and Demented Elders in a Prevalence-Stratified Sample

“…Our sample is an approximation of the typical primary care setting and not an actual random sample drawn from consecutive patients in one or more clinics in diverse geographical areas. We also have not compared the MOST with brief and reportedly accurate, measures of cognition recently made available in other parts of the world [22][23][24][25]. All of these issues should be addressed in future research.…”