A novel technology to screen for cognitive impairment in the elderly

An Automated Virtual Reality Program Accurately Diagnoses HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorders in Older People With HIV

Background

HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HANDs) remain prevalent despite antiretroviral therapy, particularly among older people with HIV (PWH). However, the diagnosis of HAND is labor intensive and requires expertise to administer neuropsychological tests. Our prior pilot work established the feasibility and accuracy of a computerized self-administered virtual reality program (DETECT; Display Enhanced Testing for Cognitive Impairment and Traumatic Brain Injury) to measure cognition in younger PWH. The present study expands this to a larger sample of older PWH.

Methods

We enrolled PWH who were ≥60 years old, were undergoing antiretroviral therapy, had undetectable plasma viral loads, and were without significant neuropsychological confounds. HAND status was determined via Frascati criteria. Regression models that controlled for demographic differences (age, sex, education, race/ethnicity) examined the association between DETECT's cognition module and both HAND status and Global Deficit Score (GDS) derived via traditional neuropsychological tests.

Results

Seventy-nine PWH (mean age, 66 years; 28% women) completed a comprehensive neuropsychological battery and DETECT's cognition module. Twenty-five (32%) had HAND based on the comprehensive battery. A significant correlation was found between the DETECT cognition module and the neuropsychological battery (r = 0.45, P < .001). Furthermore, in two separate regression models, HAND status (b = -0.79, P < .001) and GDS impairment status (b = -0.83, P < .001) significantly predicted DETECT performance. Areas under the curve for DETECT were 0.78 for differentiating participants by HAND status (HAND vs no HAND) and 0.85 for detecting GDS impairment.

Conclusions

The DETECT cognition module provides a novel means to identify cognitive impairment in older PWH. As DETECT is fully immersive and self-administered, this virtual reality tool holds promise as a scalable cognitive screening battery.

Mini-Cog for the detection of dementia within a secondary care setting

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias relies on clinical assessment. There is a high prevalence of cognitive disorders, including undiagnosed dementia in secondary care settings. Short cognitive tests can be helpful in identifying those who require further specialist diagnostic assessment; however, there is a lack of consensus around the optimal tools to use in clinical practice. The Mini-Cog is a short cognitive test comprising three-item recall and a clock-drawing test that is used in secondary care settings.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to determine the accuracy of the Mini-Cog for detecting dementia in a secondary care setting. The secondary objectives were to investigate the heterogeneity of test accuracy in the included studies and potential sources of heterogeneity. These potential sources of heterogeneity will include the baseline prevalence of dementia in study samples, thresholds used to determine positive test results, the type of dementia (Alzheimer's disease dementia or all causes of dementia), and aspects of study design related to study quality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources in September 2012, with an update to 12 March 2019: Cochrane Dementia Group Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), BIOSIS Previews (Web of Knowledge), Science Citation Index (ISI Web of Knowledge), PsycINFO (OvidSP), and LILACS (BIREME). We made no exclusions with regard to language of Mini-Cog administration or language of publication, using translation services where necessary.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included cross-sectional studies and excluded case-control designs, due to the risk of bias. We selected those studies that included the Mini-Cog as an index test to diagnose dementia where dementia diagnosis was confirmed with reference standard clinical assessment using standardised dementia diagnostic criteria. We only included studies in secondary care settings (including inpatient and outpatient hospital participants).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We screened all titles and abstracts generated by the electronic database searches. Two review authors independently checked full papers for eligibility and extracted data. We determined quality assessment (risk of bias and applicability) using the QUADAS-2 tool. We extracted data into two-by-two tables to allow calculation of accuracy metrics for individual studies, reporting the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals of these measures, summarising them graphically using forest plots.

MAIN RESULTS

Three studies with a total of 2560 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria, set in neuropsychology outpatient referrals, outpatients attending a general medicine clinic, and referrals to a memory clinic. Only n = 1415 (55.3%) of participants were included in the analysis to inform evaluation of Mini-Cog test accuracy, due to the selective use of available data by study authors. There were concerns related to high risk of bias with respect to patient selection, and unclear risk of bias and high concerns related to index test conduct and applicability. In all studies, the Mini-Cog was retrospectively derived from historic data sets. No studies included acute general hospital inpatients. The prevalence of dementia ranged from 32.2% to 87.3%. The sensitivities of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies were reported as 0.67 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 0.71), 0.60 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.72), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.90). The specificity of the Mini-Cog for each individual study was 0.87 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.92), 0.65 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.73), and 1.00 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.00). We did not perform meta-analysis due to concerns related to risk of bias and heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review identified only a limited number of diagnostic test accuracy studies using Mini-Cog in secondary care settings. Those identified were at high risk of bias related to patient selection and high concerns related to index test conduct and applicability. The evidence was indirect, as all studies evaluated Mini-Cog differently from the review question, where it was anticipated that studies would conduct Mini-Cog and independently but contemporaneously perform a reference standard assessment to diagnose dementia. The pattern of test accuracy varied across the three studies. Future research should evaluate Mini-Cog as a test in itself, rather than derived from other neuropsychological assessments. There is also a need for evaluation of the feasibility of the Mini-Cog for the detection of dementia to help adequately determine its role in the clinical pathway.

A Novel Neuropsychological Tool for Immersive Assessment of Concussion and Correlation with Subclinical Head Impacts

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) remains a diagnostic challenge and therefore strategies for objective assessment of neurological function are key to limiting long-term sequelae. Current assessment methods are not optimal in austere environments such as athletic fields; therefore, we developed an immersive tool, the Display Enhanced Testing for Cognitive Impairment and mTBI (DETECT) platform, for rapid objective neuropsychological (NP) testing. The objectives of this study were to assess the ability of DETECT to accurately identify neurocognitive deficits associated with concussion and evaluate the relationship between neurocognitive measures and subconcussive head impacts. DETECT was used over a single season of two high school and two college football teams. Study participants were instrumented with Riddell Head Impact Telemetry (HIT) sensors and a subset tested with DETECT immediately after confirmed impacts for different combinations of linear and rotational acceleration. A total of 123 athletes were enrolled and completed baseline testing. Twenty-one players were pulled from play for suspected concussion and tested with DETECT. DETECT was 86.7% sensitive (95% confidence interval [CI]: 59.5%, 98.3%) and 66.7% specific (95% CI: 22.3%, 95.7%) in correctly identifying athletes with concussions (15 of 21). Weak but significant correlations were found between complex choice response time (processing speed and divided attention) and both linear (Spearman rank correlation coefficient 0.262, p = 0.02) and rotational (Spearman coefficient 0.254, p = 0.03) acceleration on a subset of 76 players (113 DETECT tests) with no concussion symptoms. This study demonstrates that DETECT confers moderate to high sensitivity in identifying acute cognitive impairment and suggests that football impacts that do not result in concussion may negatively affect cognitive performance immediately following an impact. Specificity, however, was not optimal and points to the need for additional studies across multiple neurological domains. Given the need for more objective concussion screening in triage situations, DETECT may provide a solution for mTBI assessment.

Validation of SATURN, a free, electronic, self-administered cognitive screening test

BACKGROUND

Cognitive screening is limited by clinician time and variability in administration and scoring. We therefore developed Self-Administered Tasks Uncovering Risk of Neurodegeneration (SATURN), a free, public-domain, self-administered, and automatically scored cognitive screening test, and validated it on inexpensive (<$100) computer tablets.

METHODS

SATURN is a 30-point test including orientation, word recall, and math items adapted from the Saint Louis University Mental Status test, modified versions of the Stroop and Trails tasks, and other assessments of visuospatial function and memory. English-speaking neurology clinic patients and their partners 50 to 89 years of age were given SATURN, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and a brief survey about test preferences. For patients recruited from dementia clinics (n = 23), clinical status was quantified with the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scale. Care partners (n = 37) were assigned CDR = 0.

RESULTS

SATURN and MoCA scores were highly correlated (P < .00001; r = 0.90). CDR sum-of-boxes scores were well-correlated with both tests (P < .00001) (r = -0.83 and -0.86, respectively). Statistically, neither test was superior. Most participants (83%) reported that SATURN was easy to use, and most either preferred SATURN over the MoCA (47%) or had no preference (32%).

DISCUSSION

Performance on SATURN-a fully self-administered and freely available (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.02v6wwpzr) cognitive screening test-is well-correlated with MoCA and CDR scores.

Implementing Remote Memory Clinics to Enhance Clinical Care During and After COVID-19

Social isolation is likely to be recommended for older adults due to COVID-19, with ongoing reduced clinical contact suggested for this population. This has increased the need for remote memory clinics, we therefore review the literature, current practices and guidelines on organizing such remote memory clinics, focusing on assessment of cognition, function and other relevant measurements, proposing a novel pathway based on three levels of complexity: simple telephone or video-based interviews and testing using available tests (Level 1), digitized and validated methods based on standard pen-and-paper tests and scales (Level 2), and finally fully digitized cognitive batteries and remote measurement technologies (RMTs, Level 3). Pros and cons of these strategies are discussed. Remotely collected data negates the need for frail patients or carers to commute to clinic and offers valuable insights into progression over time, as well as treatment responses to therapeutic interventions, providing a more realistic and contextualized environment for data-collection. Notwithstanding several challenges related to internet access, computer skills, limited evidence base and regulatory and data protection issues, digital biomarkers collected remotely have significant potential for diagnosis and symptom management in older adults and we propose a framework and pathway for how technologies can be implemented to support remote memory clinics. These platforms are also well-placed for administration of digital cognitive training and other interventions. The individual, societal and public/private costs of COVID-19 are high and will continue to rise for some time but the challenges the pandemic has placed on memory services also provides an opportunity to embrace novel approaches. Remote memory clinics' financial, logistical, clinical and practical benefits have been highlighted by COVID-19, supporting their use to not only be maintained when social distancing legislation is lifted but to be devoted extra resources and attention to fully potentiate this valuable arm of clinical assessment and care.

Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias within a secondary care setting

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias relies on clinical assessment. There is a high prevalence of cognitive disorders, including undiagnosed dementia in secondary care settings. Short cognitive tests can be helpful in identifying those who require further specialist diagnostic assessment; however, there is a lack of consensus around the optimal tools to use in clinical practice. The Mini-Cog is a short cognitive test comprising three-item recall and a clock-drawing test that is used in secondary care settings.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog for detecting Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias in a secondary care setting. The secondary objectives were to investigate the heterogeneity of test accuracy in the included studies and potential sources of heterogeneity. These potential sources of heterogeneity will include the baseline prevalence of dementia in study samples, thresholds used to determine positive test results, the type of dementia (Alzheimer's disease dementia or all causes of dementia), and aspects of study design related to study quality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources in September 2012, with an update to 12 March 2019: Cochrane Dementia Group Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), BIOSIS Previews (Web of Knowledge), Science Citation Index (ISI Web of Knowledge), PsycINFO (OvidSP), and LILACS (BIREME). We made no exclusions with regard to language of Mini-Cog administration or language of publication, using translation services where necessary.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included cross-sectional studies and excluded case-control designs, due to the risk of bias. We selected those studies that included the Mini-Cog as an index test to diagnose dementia where dementia diagnosis was confirmed with reference standard clinical assessment using standardised dementia diagnostic criteria. We only included studies in secondary care settings (including inpatient and outpatient hospital participants).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We screened all titles and abstracts generated by the electronic database searches. Two review authors independently checked full papers for eligibility and extracted data. We determined quality assessment (risk of bias and applicability) using the QUADAS-2 tool. We extracted data into two-by-two tables to allow calculation of accuracy metrics for individual studies, reporting the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals of these measures, summarising them graphically using forest plots.

MAIN RESULTS

Three studies with a total of 2560 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria, set in neuropsychology outpatient referrals, outpatients attending a general medicine clinic, and referrals to a memory clinic. Only n = 1415 (55.3%) of participants were included in the analysis to inform evaluation of Mini-Cog test accuracy, due to the selective use of available data by study authors. There were concerns related to high risk of bias with respect to patient selection, and unclear risk of bias and high concerns related to index test conduct and applicability. In all studies, the Mini-Cog was retrospectively derived from historic data sets. No studies included acute general hospital inpatients. The prevalence of dementia ranged from 32.2% to 87.3%. The sensitivities of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies were reported as 0.67 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 0.71), 0.60 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.72), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.90). The specificity of the Mini-Cog for each individual study was 0.87 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.92), 0.65 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.73), and 1.00 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.00). We did not perform meta-analysis due to concerns related to risk of bias and heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review identified only a limited number of diagnostic test accuracy studies using Mini-Cog in secondary care settings. Those identified were at high risk of bias related to patient selection and high concerns related to index test conduct and applicability. The evidence was indirect, as all studies evaluated Mini-Cog differently from the review question, where it was anticipated that studies would conduct Mini-Cog and independently but contemporaneously perform a reference standard assessment to diagnose dementia. The pattern of test accuracy varied across the three studies. Future research should evaluate Mini-Cog as a test in itself, rather than derived from other neuropsychological assessments. There is also a need for evaluation of the feasibility of the Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of dementia to help adequately determine its role in the clinical pathway.

Brief cognitive screening instruments for early detection of Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was (1) to give an overview of the available short screening instruments for the early detection of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and (2) to review the psychometric properties of these instruments.

METHODS

First, a systematic search of titles and abstracts of PubMed and Web of Science was conducted between February and July 2015 and updated in April 2016 and May 2018. Only papers written in English or Dutch were considered. All full-text papers about cognitive screening instruments for the early detection of AD were included, resulting in the identification of 38 pencil and paper tests and 12 computer tests. In a second step, the psychometric quality of these instruments was evaluated. Therefore, the same databases were searched again to identify papers that described the psychometric properties of the instruments meanwhile applying diagnostic criteria for the diagnostic groups included.

RESULTS

Out of 1454 papers, 96 clearly discussed the psychometric properties of the instruments. Eighty-nine papers discussed pencil and paper tests of which 80 were validated in a memory clinic setting. Based on the number of studies (31 articles) and the sensitivity (84%) and specificity (74%) values, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) seems to be a promising (pencil and paper) screening test for memory clinic testing as well as for population screening. Regarding computer tests, validation studies were only available for 7 out of 12 tests.

CONCLUSIONS

A large number of screening tests for AD are available. However, most tests are only validated in a memory clinic setting and description of the psychometric properties of the instruments is limited. Especially, computer tests require further research. The MoCA is a promising instrument, but the specificity to detect early AD is rather low.

Preliminary study of a novel cognitive assessment device for the evaluation of HIV-associated neurocognitive impairment

Given the high prevalence of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND), we examined the performance of a novel computerized cognitive assessment device (NCAD) for the evaluation of neurocognitive impairment in the setting of HIV. In addition to a standard 8-test neuropsychological battery, each participant underwent testing with the NCAD, which requires approximately 20 min and has been shown to accurately measure neurocognition in elderly individuals. The NCAD yields seven subtest scores in addition to an overall predictive score that is calculated based on subtest results. Thirty-nine HIV-infected participants were included in this study; the majority of which (71.8 %) had undetectable plasma HIV RNA levels and a history of significant immunocompromise (median nadir CD4+ count 34 cells/μl). The mean composite neuropsychological score (NPT-8) was 46.07, and mean global deficit score (GDS) was 0.59. NCAD total subtest accuracy correlated significantly with NPT-8 (Pearson correlation r = 0.59, p < 0.0001) as well as GDS (Spearman's rho = -0.36, p = 0.02). NCAD predictive score also correlated significantly with NPT-8 (Spearman's rho = -0.5601, p = 0.0016) and GDS (Spearman's rho = 0.45, p = 0.0144). When using the most recent nosology of HAND criteria for neurocognitive impairment, the area under the curve (AUC) for NCAD total subtest accuracy was 0.7562 (p = 0.012), while the AUC for the HIV dementia scale was 0.508 (p = 0.930). While not as comprehensive as a full neuropsychological battery, the NCAD shows promise as a rapid screening tool for HIV-infected individuals, and additional research of this device is indicated.

Evoked potentials and neuropsychological tests validate Positron Emission Topography (PET) brain metabolism in cognitively impaired patients

Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) Positron Emission Topography (PET) brain hypometabolism (HM) correlates with diminished cognitive capacity and risk of developing dementia. However, because clinical utility of PET is limited by cost, we sought to determine whether a less costly electrophysiological measure, the P300 evoked potential, in combination with neuropsychological test performance, would validate PET HM in neuropsychiatric patients. We found that patients with amnestic and non-amnestic cognitive impairment and HM (n = 43) evidenced significantly reduced P300 amplitudes, delayed latencies, and neuropsychological deficits, compared to patients with normal brain metabolism (NM; n = 187). Data from patients with missing cognitive test scores (n = 57) were removed from the final sample, and logistic regression modeling was performed on the modified sample (n = 173, p = .000004). The logistic regression modeling, based on P300 and neuropsychological measures, was used to validate membership in the HM vs. NM groups. It showed classification validation in 13/25 HM subjects (52.0%) and in 125/148 NM subjects (84.5%), correlating with total classification accuracy of 79.8%. In this paper, abnormal P300 evoked potentials coupled with cognitive test impairment validates brain metabolism and mild/moderate cognitive impairment (MCI). To this end, we cautiously propose incorporating electrophysiological and neuropsychological assessments as cost-effective brain metabolism and MCI indicators in primary care. Final interpretation of these results must await required additional studies confirming these interesting results.