The factorial structure of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in Japanese dementia patients

Time orientation and visual construction subdomains of the MMSE as independent risk factors for hip fractures

Hip fractures may result in severe morbidity and mortality among elderly patients. Many risk factors for hip fracture have been identified, including cognitive impairment. The authors used the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), a screen test for cognitive impairment, as the study material for their hip fracture survey. The authors hypothesized that certain subdomains would have a strong association with hip fractures. A total of 217 individuals with hip fracture and 215 individuals without hip fractures matched by age and sex were recruited for the study. A standardized questionnaire was used to register their MMSE performance and demographic data. Scores for these subdomains were analyzed using conditional logistic regression with adjustment of 5 clinically important risk factors for hip fractures, including educational level, difficulty with activities of daily living, physical activities, body mass index, and bone mineral density. In univariate analyses, those subdomains with lower scores had significantly higher hip fracture risks. In multivariate analyses, only the subdomains time orientation and visual construction remained significant. Further receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that these 2 subdomains could differentiate hip fractures from nonfractures better than total MMSE. Time orientation and visual construction subdomains are strong predictors for hip fractures and can be used effectively in the hospital to screen patients at high risk of hip fractures. Prospective cohort studies are warranted to further validate this finding.

Differences in dual-task performance and prefrontal cortex activation between younger and older adults

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to examine task-related changes in prefrontal cortex (PFC) activity during a dual-task in both healthy young and older adults and compare patterns of activation between the age groups. We also sought to determine whether brain activation during a dual-task relates to executive/attentional function and how measured factors associated with both of these functions vary between older and younger adults.

RESULTS

Thirty-five healthy volunteers (20 young and 15 elderly) participated in this study. Near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) was employed to measure PFC activation during a single-task (performing calculations or stepping) and dual-task (performing both single-tasks at once). Cognitive function was assessed in the older patients with the Trail-making test part B (TMT-B). Major outcomes were task performance, brain activation during task (oxygenated haemoglobin: Oxy-Hb) measured by NIRS, and TMT-B score. Mixed ANOVAs were used to compare task factors and age groups in task performance. Mixed ANOVAs also compared task factors, age group and time factors in task-induced changes in measured Oxy-Hb. Among the older participants, correlations between the TMT-B score and Oxy-Hb values measured in each single-task and in the dual-task were examined using a Pearson correlation coefficient.Oxy-Hb values were significantly increased in both the calculation task and the dual-task within patients in both age groups. However, the Oxy-Hb values associated with there were higher in the older group during the post-task period for the dual-task. Also, there were significant negative correlations between both task-performance accuracy and Oxy-Hb values during the dual-task and participant TMT-B scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Older adults demonstrated age-specific PFC activation in response to dual-task challenge. There was also a significant negative correlation between PFC activation during dual-task and executive/attentional function. These findings suggest that the high cognitive load induced by dual-task activity generates increased PFC activity in older adults. However, this relationship appeared to be strongest in participants with better baseline attention and executive functions.

A retrospective analysis of the sentence writing component of the Mini Mental State Examination: cognitive and affective aspects

BACKGROUND

One of the components of the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the request to write a sentence. We investigated the relationship between the characteristics of the written sentence of the MMSE and the cognitive and affective status of elderly patients.

METHODS

The characteristics of the sentence were compared to the total MMSE score, sociodemographic characteristics, tests evaluating cognition and affective status, and diagnoses.

RESULTS

The number of words was significantly associated with the degree of cognitive impairment, whereas the emotional polarity of sentences and concerns about health were associated with depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Characteristics of the MMSE sentence may provide important additional information regarding both cognition and affect when assessing older people.

Using the Folstein Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) to explore methodological issues in cognitive aging research

Cognitive scales are used frequently in geriatric research and practice. These instruments are constructed with underlying assumptions that are a part of their validation process. A common measurement scale used in older adults is the Folstein Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE). The MMSE was designed to screen for cognitive impairment and is used often in geriatric research. This paper has three aims. Aim one was to explore four potential threats to validity in the use of the MMSE: (1) administering the exam without meeting the underlying assumptions, (2) not reporting that the underlying assumptions were assessed prior to test administration, (3) use of variable and inconsistent cut-off scores for the determination of presence of cognitive impairment, and (4) failure to adjust the scores based on the demographic characteristics of the tested subject. Aim two was to conduct a literature search to determine if the assumptions of (1) education level assessment, (2) sensory assessment, and (3) language fluency were being met and clearly reported in published research using the MMSE. Aim three was to provide recommendations to minimalize threats to validity in research studies that use cognitive scales, such as the MMSE. We found inconsistencies in published work in reporting whether or not subjects meet the assumptions that underlie a reliable and valid MMSE score. These inconsistencies can pose threats to the reliability of exam results. Fourteen of the 50 studies reviewed reported inclusion of all three of these assumptions. Inconsistencies in reporting the inclusion of the underlying assumptions for a reliable score could mean that subjects were not appropriate to be tested by use of the MMSE or that an appropriate test administration of the MMSE was not clearly reported. Thus, the research literature could have threats to both validity and reliability based on misuse of or improper reported use of the MMSE. Six recommendations are provided to minimalize these threats in future research.

Using the Folstein Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) to explore methodological issues in cognitive aging research

Cognitive scales are used frequently in geriatric research and practice. These instruments are constructed with underlying assumptions that are a part of their validation process. A common measurement scale used in older adults is the Folstein Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE). The MMSE was designed to screen for cognitive impairment and is used often in geriatric research. This paper has three aims. Aim one was to explore four potential threats to validity in the use of the MMSE: (1) administering the exam without meeting the underlying assumptions, (2) not reporting that the underlying assumptions were assessed prior to test administration, (3) use of variable and inconsistent cut-off scores for the determination of presence of cognitive impairment, and (4) failure to adjust the scores based on the demographic characteristics of the tested subject. Aim two was to conduct a literature search to determine if the assumptions of (1) education level assessment, (2) sensory assessment, and (3) language fluency were being met and clearly reported in published research using the MMSE. Aim three was to provide recommendations to minimalize threats to validity in research studies that use cognitive scales, such as the MMSE. We found inconsistencies in published work in reporting whether or not subjects meet the assumptions that underlie a reliable and valid MMSE score. These inconsistencies can pose threats to the reliability of exam results. Fourteen of the 50 studies reviewed reported inclusion of all three of these assumptions. Inconsistencies in reporting the inclusion of the underlying assumptions for a reliable score could mean that subjects were not appropriate to be tested by use of the MMSE or that an appropriate test administration of the MMSE was not clearly reported. Thus, the research literature could have threats to both validity and reliability based on misuse of or improper reported use of the MMSE. Six recommendations are provided to minimalize these threats in future research.

Temporal resolution deficits in patients with refractory complex partial seizures and mesial temporal sclerosis (MTS)

We studied the temporal resolution ability in patients with refractory complex partial seizures and mesial temporal sclerosis (MTS) using Gaps-In-Noise (GIN) test in a prospective cross-sectional study. Thirteen patients with right MTS (age: 31±7.67 years; M:F=8:5) and 13 patients with left MTS (age: 25.76±8.26 years; M:F=9:4) having normal hearing and mini-mental state examination (MMSE) score of >23/30 were recruited. Fifty healthy volunteers (26.3±5.17 years; M:F=28:22) formed the control group. Gaps-In-Noise test demonstrated impaired temporal resolution: 69.2% of patients with right MTS (RMTS) and 76.9% of patients with left MTS (LMTS) had abnormal scores in the right ear for gap detection threshold (GDT) measure. Similarly, 53.8% of patients in the RMTS group and 76.9% of patients in the LMTS group had abnormal scores in the left ear. In percentage of correct identification (PCI), 46.1% of patients with RMTS and 69.2% of patients with LMTS had poorer scores in the right ear, whereas 46.1% of patients with RMTS and 61.5% of patients with LMTS had poorer scores in the left ear. Both patient groups, viz., RMTS and LMTS, demonstrated bilateral temporal resolution deficits.