Validation of the Cuban Version of Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-Revised for&lt;b&gt;&lt;/b&gt; Screening&lt;b&gt;&lt;/b&gt; Mild Cognitive Impairment

Broche-Pérez, Yunier; López-Pujol, Héctor Alejandro

doi:10.1159/000481345

Cited by 6 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…MCI Group (amnestic-multidomain subtype). We employed the criteria proposed by Petersen:23 significant impairment of the patient and/or caregiver’s report with objective evidence of memory decline compared to equivalent controls for age, sex, and years of education; Clinical Dementia Rating scale [CDR] score of 0.5, ACE-R scores<85 according to Cuban validation study, 24 and preservation of activities of daily living. Subjects with potential causes of cognitive decline other than neurodegenerative or cerebrovascular disease (e.g.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinical utility of the INECO Frontal Screening for detecting Mild Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson’s disease

Broche-Pérez

Bartuste-Marrer²,

Batule-Domínguez³

et al. 2019

Dement. neuropsychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive deficits in Parkinson’s disease typically affect executive functions. Recently, the concept of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) has been related to PD (PD-MCI). PD-MCI is considered a transition phase to Parkinson’s disease Dementia. Therefore, it is important to identify PD-MCI in a reliable way. Objective: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the INECO Frontal Screening (IFS) in detecting cognitive deficits in PD-MCI. Additionally, we compare the IFS and the Addenbrook Cognitive Examination Revised (ACE-R) between three groups; PD-MCI, MCI, and controls. Methods: The IFS and ACE-R were administered to 36 patients with PD-MCI, 31 with MCI (amnestic-multidomain subtype) and 92 healthy controls. Sensitivity and specificity were determined using ROC analysis. The groups were compared using one-way analysis of variance. Results: The IFS had adequate accuracy in differentiating patients with PD-MCI from healthy controls (AUC=0.77, sensitivity=0.82, specificity=0.77), and good accuracy in differentiating PD-MCI from MCI patients (AUC=0.80, sensitivity=0.82, specificity=0.61). However the IFS had low accuracy in differentiating MCI patients from healthy controls (AUC=0.47, sensitivity=0.52, specificity=0.41). On the ACE-R, the PD-MCI group had low performance in Fluency and Language. Only patients with PD-MCI had difficulties on the IFS, specifically in inhibitory control and visual working memory. This dysexecutive profile explains the sensitivity and specificity values found in the IFS. Conclusion: The present study results suggest that the IFS is a suitable screening tool for exploring cognitive dysfunction in PD-MCI, especially in those patients with a dysexecutive profile.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Control Group. The criteria for the control group were as follows: a score >85 on the ACE-R,24 no subjective memory complaints, preserved functioning in activities of daily living. Healthy controls had no neurological or psychiatric disorders.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical utility of the INECO Frontal Screening for detecting Mild Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson’s disease

Broche-Pérez

Bartuste-Marrer²,

Batule-Domínguez³

et al. 2019

Dement. neuropsychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The following criteria were used to select the control group: scoring more than 85 points on the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination Revised (ACE-R), 21 no subjective complaints of memory, and preserved functioning in the activities of daily living. Psychiatric history was reported by the participants during the initial interview (conducted by an experienced psychiatrist) and an experienced neurologist performed the neurological examination.…”

Section: Healthy Control Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mild cognitive impairment Group (multiple-domain aMCI subtype) MCI patients were classified using the criteria proposed by Petersen: 2 objective impairment in formal neuropsychological measures (total score in ACE-R of at least 1.5 standard deviation [SD]below the demographically corrected mean) 21 and preservation of activities of daily living (Barthel index>95). 22 Patients with potential causes of cognitive deficits different than neurodegenerative or cerebrovascular disease (e.g., Schizophrenia, alcoholism, epilepsy, depression, head injury) were excluded.…”

Section: Healthy Control Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of sensitivity and specificity of the INECO Frontal Screening and the Frontal Assessment Battery in mild cognitive impairment

Fernández-Fleites

Jiménez-Puig

Broche-Pérez

et al. 2021

Dement. neuropsychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) and the INECO Frontal Screening (IFS) are two instruments frequently used to explore cognitive deficits in different diseases. However, studies reporting their use in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are limited. Objective: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of FAB and IFS in mild cognitive impairment (multiple-domain amnestic MCI subtype — md-aMCI). Methods: IFS and FAB were administered to 30 md-aMCI patients and 59 healthy participants. Sensitivity and specificity were investigated using the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results: The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of IFS for MCI patients was .82 (sensitivity=0.96; specificity=0.76), whereas the AUC of FAB was 0.74 (sensitivity=0.73; specificity=0.70). Conclusions: In comparison to FAB, IFS showed higher sensitivity and specificity for the detection of executive dysfunctions in md-aMCI subtype. The use of IFS in everyday clinical practice would allow detecting the frontal dysfunctions in MCI patients with greater precision, enabling the early intervention and impeding the transition to more severe cognitive alterations.

show abstract

“…En relación al primer objetivo, es posible observar que los tres instrumentos son disímiles en su confiabilidad y estructura factorial. En efecto, la confiabilidad del MMSE en este estudio fue baja, a diferencia del ACE-R y el MoCA cuyas confiabilidades fueron adecuadas; resultado consistente con estudios realizados en otros países 29,30 . Con respecto a la estructura factorial de los instrumentos, es posible señalar que en el caso del MMSE, una solución con cuatro dominios cognitivos en donde memoria es eliminado resulta teóricamente cuestionable, ya que la memoria es un proceso cognitivo imprescindible de evaluar para la detección de demencia tipo Alzheimer 31 .…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Evaluación de funcionamiento cognitivo en adultos: Análisis y contrastación de tres de los instrumentos de mayor divulgación en Chile

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychometric properties of three instruments to detect dementiaBackground: Several instruments are available to measure cognitive functioning in older adults. However, there is paucity of information about their factorial structure and psychometric properties. Aim: To determine the factorial structure and the internal reliability of the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Adenbrookke´s Cognitive Examination (ACE-R), and their cognitive impairment detection capabilities. Material and Methods: MMSE, MoCA and ACE-R were applied to 203 older adults aged 54 to 88 years (77% women), excluding participants with dementia. Results: The factorial structure of the MMSE suggested that items referred to memory process should be eliminated due to their low reliability and factor loading (b = 0.12; p = 0.146). Although the MoCA had a good reliability, object denomination process items also had to be dropped (b = 0.22; p = 0.003). The ACE-R demonstrated a single factorial structure for all cognitive processes and had a good internal consistency. MMSE, MoCA and ACE-R classified as having dementia 5, 27 and 42% of participants, respectively. Conclusions: MoCA and the ACE-R scales appear as better instruments to detect dementia in older people.

show abstract

Validation of the Cuban Version of Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-Revised for<b></b> Screening<b></b> Mild Cognitive Impairment

Cited by 6 publications

References 24 publications

Clinical utility of the INECO Frontal Screening for detecting Mild Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson’s disease

Clinical utility of the INECO Frontal Screening for detecting Mild Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson’s disease

Evaluation of sensitivity and specificity of the INECO Frontal Screening and the Frontal Assessment Battery in mild cognitive impairment

Evaluación de funcionamiento cognitivo en adultos: Análisis y contrastación de tres de los instrumentos de mayor divulgación en Chile

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About