DOCSLIB.ORG

ALLFTD Neuropsychological Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ALLFTD Neuropsychological Assessment ALLFTD Neuropsychological Assessment Katya Rascovsky, PhD On behalf of the ALLFTD Neuropsychology Work Group 1 Overview • Introduction • FTLD-NACC module for differential diagnosis • UDS3 in familial FTD • Longitudinal modeling of FTLD-NACC in familial FTD • Changes to NIH-Examiner administration • Tablet-based assessment • Data quality issues/error checks • Discussion and conclusions Challenges • Clinical heterogeneity • Pre-symptomatic vs. symptomatic • Cross-sectional vs. longitudinal Depends on question • Differential diagnosis (specific) • Earliest detectable change (sensitive) What is ideal? • Longitudinal tracking (sensitive, wide range, limited floor, ceiling, learning effects) • Clinical trials (target population) • Time / frustration What is practical? • Shared instruments • Personnel / training / reliability • Readily available Global / Visuospatial / Memory Domain ALLFTD GENFI CReATe Global Cognitive Montreal Cognitive Mini-Mental State Examination Edinburgh Cognitive and Assessment (MoCA) (MMSE) Behavioral Screen (ECAS) Visuospatial / Benson Complex Figure Copy Benson Complex Figure Copy Constructional Block Design Judgment of Line Orientation (JOLO) Episodic Memory Benson Complex Figure Benson Complex Figure (Delayed Recall) (Delayed Recall) California Verbal Learning Test Free and Cued Selective Rey Auditory Verbal Learning – Short Form (CVLT-SF) Reminding Test (FCSRT) Test (RAVLT) Craft Story (Immediate & Logical Memory Recognition Delayed Recall) Doors from Doors and People Test Language Domain ALLFTD GENFI CReATe Language Phonemic Fluency (F-L words)* Phonemic Fluency (F-A-S Phonemic Fluency (F-S-P words)* words)* Category Fluency (Animals & Vegetables)* Category Fluency (Animals)* Category Fluency (Animals & Actions)* Multilingual Naming Test* Boston Naming Test (30 item – modified) Boston Naming Test (30 item) Word Reading – Regular and Camel and Cactus Test (32 item) North American Adult Reading Irregular Words Test Revised (NART-R) Noun and Verb Naming Subtests Writing Fluency Index (Animals Semantic Word Picture Matching and Actions) Test Semantic Associates Test Northwestern Anagram Test- SF Sentence Reading Sentence Repetition WM & Executive Functions Domain ALLFTD GENFI CReATe Working Number Span Test (Forward & Digit Span Test (Forward & Back) ECAS Digit Span (Back) memory Back) EXAMINER Working Memory Factor • Dot Counting • N-back (1-back) • N-back (2-back) Attention / Trial Making Test A Trial Making Test A Trial Making Test A Processing Speed Digit Symbol Test Executive / Trial Making Test B Trial Making Test B Trial Making Test B cognitive flexibility EXAMINER Cognitive Control D-KEFS Color-Word Interference Oral Trails Index Factor Test Modified Wisconsin Card • Flanker Sorting Test (MWCST) • Set Shifting UDS3: % total A/L participants 100 90 80 70 999 60 998 997 50 996 995 40 ceiling % total participants total % range floor 30 20 10 0 Craft IV Benson C Digits FC Digits BC Animals TMT-A TMT-B Craft DV Benson DR MINT VF-F Year 1 data from 10/19 data freeze (n=1,396) 100 100 90 90 80 80 70 999 70 999 998 998 60 60 997 997 50 50 996 996 40 40 995 995 30 30 UDS3 % CDR 0 ceiling UDS3 % CDR 1 ceiling 20 20 range range 10 10 floor floor 0 0 100 100 90 90 80 80 70 999 70 999 998 60 998 60 997 997 50 50 996 996 40 40 995 995 UDS3 % CDR 3 30 30 UDS3 % CDR 2 ceiling ceiling 20 20 range range 10 floor 10 floor 0 0 FTLD-NACC: % total A/L participants 100 90 80 70 999 60 998 997 50 996 995 40 ceiling % total participants total % range floor 30 20 10 0 Regular W Irregular W WPMT Sem Assoc NWAT S Repetition S Reading Noun N Verb N Year 1 data from 10/19 data freeze (n=1,396) 100 100 90 90 80 80 999 999 70 70 998 998 60 60 997 50 50 997 996 40 40 996 30 995 30 995 FTLD % CDR 1 FTLD % CDR 0 CDR % FTLD 20 ceiling 20 ceiling 10 range 10 range 0 floor 0 floor 100 100 90 90 80 80 999 999 70 70 998 998 60 60 50 997 50 997 40 996 40 996 30 995 30 995 FTLD % CDR 3 CDR % FTLD FTLD % CDR 2 CDR % FTLD 20 ceiling 20 ceiling 10 range 10 range 0 floor 0 floor Examiner: % total A/L participants 100 90 80 70 999 60 998 997 50 996 995 40 ceiling % total participants total % range 30 floor 20 10 0 N1B N2B Dot Count Set shift Flanker Ex F words Ex Animals Year 1 data from 10/19 data freeze (n=1,396) 100 100 90 90 80 80 999 999 70 998 70 998 60 997 60 997 50 996 50 996 995 40 995 40 ceiling ceiling 30 30 range range Examiner % CDR 1 Examiner Examiner % CDR 0 20 20 floor floor 10 10 0 0 N1B N2B Dot Count Set shift Flanker Ex F words Ex Animals N1B N2B Dot Count Set shift Flanker Ex F words Ex Animals 100 100 90 90 80 999 80 999 70 998 70 998 60 997 60 997 50 996 50 996 40 995 40 995 ceiling 30 ceiling Examiner Examiner % CDR 2 30 Examiner Examiner % CDR 3 range range 20 20 floor floor 10 10 0 0 N1B N2B Dot Count Set shift Flanker Ex F words Ex Animals N1B N2B Dot Count Set shift Flanker Ex F words Ex Animals Criteria for Evaluation of Clinical and other Measures • Differential diagnosis: Does it differentiate between clinical syndromes? Useful in how many syndromes? • Disease progression: Does it change over time in asymptomatic or symptomatic individuals? Effect size? • Clinical meaningfulness: Does it reflect something a participant or family would consider important? (regulatory) • Biologically informative: Does it reveal something informative about the disease process, prediction of decline, etc.? • Too early to decide: Seems promising, but need more data. Evaluation of cognitive assessments Measure Helps with Changes over Clinically Informs More info differential dx time meaningful Biology needed to decide UDS3 FTLD-NACC NIH-Examiner CVLT-SF Tablet Yes and/or established Maybe and/or unclear No or N/A Conclusions • When choosing clinical instruments: • Define population • Define goal • Balance ideal / practical • Multilevel battery • New technology CVLT-SF CVLT-SF Delay CVLT Recog 100 100 90 90 80 80 70 70 60 60 50 50 40 40 30 30 20 20 10 10 0 0 cdr 0 cdr 0.5 cdr 1 cdr 2 cdr 3 Total cdr 0 cdr 0.5 cdr 1 cdr 2 cdr 3 Total floor range ceiling 995 996 997 998 999 floor range ceiling 995 996 997 998 999 Longitudinal Evaluation of Familial Cohort (LEFFTDS) – UDS 3.0 Battery Julie Fields Nellie Brushaber, Jeremy Syrjanen, Walter Kremers, Brad Boeve Test Battery • Common tests (or analogs), known and validated • Updated norms • Battery utilized nationwide Sample Summary • 453 family members with known mutation – MAPT, GRN, C9orf72 • 321 at least 2 visits • Follow-up to 4.5 years Baseline/Follow-up Characteristics FTLDCDR_GLOBAL 0.0 0.5 1 + Total (N=304) (N=61) (N=88) (N=453) P-value Genetic status, n (%) <.00011 C9 61 (20.1%) 25 (41.0%) 40 (45.5%) 126 (27.8%) GRN 33 (10.9%) 6 (9.8%) 20 (22.7%) 59 (13.0%) MAPT 45 (14.8%) 12 (19.7%) 22 (25.0%) 79 (17.4%) NONE 165 (54.3%) 18 (29.5%) 6 (6.8%) 189 (41.7%) Baseline age <.00012 N 304 61 88 453 Median (Range) 44.0 (18.0, 80.0) 56.0 (28.0, 80.0) 62.0 (32.0, 75.0) 51.0 (18.0, 80.0) Mean (SD) 45.0 (13.76) 55.6 (11.23) 59.6 (10.00) 49.3 (14.19) Baseline age at onset 0.02992 N 13 50 88 151 Median (Range) 44.0 (16.0, 65.0) 53.0 (12.0, 71.0) 55.0 (16.0, 72.0) 53.0 (12.0, 72.0) Mean (SD) 42.4 (15.01) 50.9 (10.74) 52.6 (12.46) 51.2 (12.40) Sex, n (%) 0.25781 0 125 (41.1%) 32 (52.5%) 39 (44.3%) 196 (43.3%) 1 179 (58.9%) 29 (47.5%) 49 (55.7%) 257 (56.7%) Ed (Years) 0.04372 N 304 61 88 453 Median (Range) 16.0 (11.0, 22.0) 14.0 (11.0, 20.0) 16.0 (12.0, 20.0) 16.0 (11.0, 22.0) Mean (SD) 15.6 (2.42) 14.8 (2.54) 15.5 (2.44) 15.5 (2.45) Total years of follow-up <.00012 N 304 61 88 453 Median (Range) 1.7 (0.0, 4.3) 1.2 (0.0, 4.5) 1.0 (0.0, 4.2) 1.3 (0.0, 4.5) Mean (SD) 1.7 (1.26) 1.5 (1.39) 1.0 (1.04) 1.5 (1.26) 1Chi-Square p-value ; 2Kruskal-Wallis p-value Baseline Cognitive (Global, Attn/Exec) FTLDCDR_GLOBAL 0.0 0.5 1 + Total (N=304) (N=61) (N=88) (N=453) P-value MoCA – Total (Z) <.00012 N 304 59 75 438 Median (Range) 0.0 (-7.0, 2.9) -1.8 (-8.6, 2.3) -4.1 (-19.6, 1.0) -0.6 (-19.6, 2.9) Mean (SD) -0.2 (1.65) -1.6 (2.19) -5.4 (4.36) -1.3 (3.08) Number Span Forward - Correct Trials (Z) <.00012 N 303 60 74 437 Median (Range) 0.0 (-3.7, 2.3) -0.3 (-2.0, 2.0) -1.1 (-3.4, 2.3) -0.3 (-3.7, 2.3) Mean (SD) 0.0 (1.03) -0.2 (0.88) -1.1 (0.99) -0.2 (1.09) Number Span Backward - Correct Trials (Z) <.00012 N 303 60 73 436 Median (Range) -0.1 (-2.6, 2.6) -0.4 (-2.6, 2.8) -1.7 (-3.8, 1.0) -0.4 (-3.8, 2.8) Mean (SD) -0.1 (1.05) -0.2 (1.15) -1.6 (1.00) -0.3 (1.20) TMT A (Z) <.00012 N 304 60 69 433 Median (Range) 0.1 (-11.9, 2.2) -0.8 (-14.2, 1.5) -3.1 (-20.5, 0.7) -0.2 (-20.5, 2.2) Mean (SD) -0.2 (1.42) -1.6 (2.65) -4.4 (4.88) -1.0 (2.92) TMT B (Z) <.00012 N 304 60 48 412 Median (Range) 0.0 (-8.2, 2.2) -1.0 (-14.1, 1.4) -3.2 (-12.3, 1.1) -0.3 (-14.1, 2.2) Mean (SD) -0.2 (1.28) -1.9 (3.17) -3.8 (3.37) -0.9 (2.33) 2Kruskal-Wallis p-value Baseline Cognitive (Language) FTLDCDR_GLOBAL 0.0 0.5 1 + Total (N=304) (N=61) (N=88) (N=453) P-value Letter Fluency (Z) <.00012 N 189 54 68 311 Median (Range) -0.1 (-2.1, 3.2) -0.8 (-3.2, 1.6) -2.2 (-4.0, 0.8) -0.6 (-4.0, 3.2) Mean (SD) -0.1 (1.00) -0.7 (1.02) -2.0 (1.17) -0.6 (1.28) Category Fluency (Z) <.00012 N 189 54 65 308 Median (Range) -0.2 (-2.9, 3.4) -0.8 (-3.8, 1.9) -2.2 (-5.4, 2.3) -0.7 (-5.4, 3.4) Mean (SD) -0.2 (1.09) -0.8 (1.16) -2.3 (1.55) -0.8 (1.45) MINT (Z) <.00012 N 303 60 72 435 Median (Range) -0.1 (-9.1, 1.4) -0.4 (-6.4, 1.2) -2.8 (-18.5, 0.8) -0.4 (-18.5, 1.4) Mean (SD) -0.4 (1.25) -0.8 (1.56) -4.1 (4.61) -1.1 (2.60) Benson Complex Figure Copy (Z) <.00012 N 302 58 77 437 Median (Range) 0.1 (-3.9, 1.3) 0.0 (-4.1, 1.3) -0.7 (-13.9, 1.2) 0.0 (-13.9, 1.3) Mean (SD) -0.1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Teleneuropsychology (Telenp) in Response to COVID-19: Practical Guidelines to Balancing Validity Concerns with Clinical Need
    Teleneuropsychology (TeleNP) in Response to COVID-19: Practical Guidelines to Balancing Validity Concerns with Clinical Need Rene Stolwyk, DPsych(Clin.Neuro), PsyBA Dustin B. Hammers, Ph.D., ABPP(CN) Senior Lecturer and Clinical Neuropsychologist Board Certified in Clinical Neuropsychology Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health Associate Professor, Department of Neurology Monash University, Melbourne, Australia University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Twitter: @rene_stolwyk Lana Harder, PhD, ABPP C. Munro Cullum, Ph.D., ABPP-CN Board Certified in Clinical Neuropsychology Professor of Psychiatry, Neurology, and Neurosurgery Board Certified Subspecialist in Pediatric Neuropsychology Pam Blumenthal Distinguished Professor of Clinical Psychology Children’s Medical Center Dallas Senior Neuropsychologist, O’Donnell Brain Institute Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Neurology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] INS Webinar Presented on 4/2/2020 Objectives Following this webinar, attendees will be able to: • Understand the evidence base supporting TeleNP procedures as well as the strengths and limitations of different models • Apply knowledge of models of TeleNP and evaluate potential feasibility within your own clinical settings • Understand key legal and ethical considerations when providing TeleNP services Outline • Ethical and Legal Challenges • Logistical and Practical Considerations • Models of TeleNP • Evidence for use of Specific Measures over TeleNP and Patient Satisfaction • Practical Considerations for Home-Based TeleNP Our Experience with TeleNP • Dr. Hammers leads the University of Utah TeleNP Program • Joint relationship between University of Utah Cognitive Disorders Clinic and St.
    [Show full text]
  • Rehabilitation Information Pack a Range of Products from Pearson Assessment for Professionals Working in the Area of Rehabilitation
    Rehabilitation Information Pack A range of products from Pearson Assessment for professionals working in the area of rehabilitation The Functional UK Administration and Scoring Manual TFL S Living Scale UK Edition Examiner’s Manual C. Munro Cullum Myron F. Weiner Kathleen C. Saine www.pearsonclinical.co.uk Welcome... Introducing our 2013 Rehabilitation Information Pack Dear Colleague, Pearson (Assessment) is one of the UK’s leading publishers of standardised assessments. Our tests are used by a number of professionals in both health and education settings and we strive to develop and distribute tools that are timely and in line with good practice guidelines. For example, we are mindful of targets set by the Department of Health, for the early recognition of debilitating neurological and cognitive disorders including dementia and the aim for ‘two-thirds of people with dementia [to be] identified and given appropriate support by 2015’. In this pack you will find a range of products that can aid you inidentifying cognitive impairments and assist you in the evaluation of your clients; helping you to plan intervention strategies and enhance your evidence- based practice. Among these assessments is the new Brief Cognitive Status Exam (BCSE) which is designed to assess a client’s cognitive ability quickly and reliably, and the RBANS™ - Update which can be used as a stand-alone “core” battery for the detection and characterization of dementia in the elderly. Together with early diagnosis, assessment of activities of daily living can be vital in assisting service users maintain independence or return to everyday life. The UK-normed Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test- Third Edition, Rookwood Driving Battery and The Functional Living Scales – UK Version all have excellent ecological validity which places assessment in real life context; making the results more meaningful to you as a professional, and your clients.
    [Show full text]
  • Test Selection Process of a Neuropsychological Assessment
    Test selection Process of a neuropsychological assessment • Review of information provided by referrer and if possible review of medical records Gather • Interview with client and his/her relative or carer information • Purpose of assessment? • Screening test? • Which measure is appropriate for my client? Test selection • Fixed vs flexible battery • Awareness of standardisation procedures Test • Awareness of scoring principles administration and scoring What do you need to consider when selecting a test? ´ Practical considerations ´ How long will it take to administer? ´ What is the time available to assess? What is the patient’s tolerance for testing? ´ Do I have access to the test I want to use? ´ Is it sensitive enough to detect my client’s problems ´ Are there problems which make it practically difficult to administer the test? (e.g., sensory and motor problems) ´ Has testing been completed previously? ´ Are parallel forms available to allow comparison of performance over time? ´ Am I qualified to use the test? Balance between undertaking an adequate assessment and over assessing. Comprehensive Neuropsychological Cognitive Screening Tests Batteries • Potential uses • Potential uses • Early identification of individuals at • Determination of presence and magnitude potential risk for condition or disorder of impairment • May indicate need for further evaluation or • Determination of diagnoses intervention • Determination of functional status, abilities, • May be used to monitor progression of and capacities symptoms or response to intervention
    [Show full text]
  • On-Line Appendix References
    ON-LINE APPENDIX with the Clinical Dementia Rating scale.15 In agreement with the Neuropsychological Assessment Petersen criteria,16 participants having a CDR score of 0.5 but no At baseline, all individuals underwent a detailed neuropsycholog- dementia and a score exceeding 1.5 SDs below the age-appropri- ical assessment. The control participants were evaluated with an ate mean in any of the above tests were confirmed as to their MCI extensive neuropsychological battery, including the MMSE,1 the status. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale,2 and the Lawton Instru- 3 mental Activities of Daily Living. Their cognitive assessment in- REFERENCES 4 cluded the following: 1) attention (Digit Symbol Code, Trail- 1. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”: a prac- Making Test A5); 2) working memory (verbal: Digit Span tical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clini- Forward4; visuospatial: Visual Memory Span Forward4); 3) epi- cian. J Psychiatr Res 1975;12:189–98 CrossRef Medline sodic memory (verbal: RI-48 Cued Recall Test6; visual: Shapes 2. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. 7 5 Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983;67:361–70 CrossRef Medline Test ); 4) executive functions: (Trail-Making Test B, Wisconsin 3. Barberger-Gateau P, Commenges D, Gagnon M, et al. Instrumental 8 9 Card Sorting Test, Phonemic Verbal Fluency Test ); 5) language activities of daily living as a screening tool for cognitive impairment (Boston Naming Test10); 6) visual gnosis (Ghent Overlapping and dementia in elderly community dwellers. J Am Geriatr Soc 1992; Figures11); 7) praxis: ideomotor,12 reflexive,13 and constructional 40:1129–34 CrossRef Medline (Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer Disease, figure 4.
    [Show full text]
  • 7.07 Neuropsychological Assessment of the Elderly
    Copyright © 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. 7.07 Neuropsychological Assessment of the Elderly JOHN R. CRAWFORD and ANNALENA VENNERI University of Aberdeen, UK and RONAN E. O'CARROLL University of Stirling, UK 7.07.1 THE AIMS OF NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 134 7.07.2 SOME SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS IN NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE ELDERLY 135 7.07.3 THE NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL INTERVIEW 136 7.07.4 BASIC PSYCHOMETRIC ISSUES 137 7.07.4.1 The Rationale of Deficit Measurement in Clinical Practice 137 7.07.4.2 Converting Scores to a Common Measurement Scale 137 7.07.4.3 Reliability 138 7.07.4.4 Reliable vs. Abnormal Differences 138 7.07.4.5 Monitoring Change 139 7.07.5 APPROACHES TO ASSESSMENT IN CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY 140 7.07.6 SCREENING TESTS FOR MENTAL STATUS 141 7.07.7 MEASURES OF CURRENT INTELLECTUAL ABILITY 141 7.07.7.1 Use of the WAIS-R with the Elderly 141 7.07.7.2 Analysis of Subtest Profiles 142 7.07.7.3 WAIS-R Factor Scores 144 7.07.8 SPECIFIC METHODS FOR THE ESTIMATION OF PREMORBID ABILITY 145 7.07.9 AGING AND MEMORY 146 7.07.9.1 Introduction to Aging and Memory 146 7.07.9.2 Age-associated Memory Impairment 147 7.07.9.3 Does Memory Functioning in Dementia Represent Accelerated Aging? 147 7.07.9.4 Commonly Used Memory Tests: Implications for use with Elderly Subjects 147 7.07.9.4.1 The Auditory Verbal Learning Test 147 7.07.9.4.2 The California Verbal Learning Test 148 7.07.9.4.3 The Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised 148 7.07.9.4.4 The Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test 149 7.07.9.4.5 The Rey Complex Figure Test 149
    [Show full text]
  • For Studies with a Dementia/Cognitive Impairment Reference Standard)
    Lees, Rosalind A. (2016) Describing cognitive and mood assessments in acute stroke. PhD thesis http://theses.gla.ac.uk/7128/ Copyright and moral rights for this thesis are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. Glasgow Theses Service http://theses.gla.ac.uk/ [email protected] Describing cognitive and mood assessments in acute stroke A thesis by Rosalind A Lees MA(Hons) Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy To The University of Glasgow From The Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences University of Glasgow Western Infirmary 2016 i Abstract Background Stroke is the foremost medical condition responsible for acquired disability and dependency. The initial psychological and physical deficits should arguably be identified early to allow interventions to be put in place if potential long-term sequelae are to be minimised. Physical impairments within stroke cohorts have been extensively researched and reported. We have access to numerous scales that describe general physical functioning during daily activities and its effects on independence and quality of life. Deficits in movement are easily identified and attributes of physical movements can be associated with such obvious measurement terms as strength, speed, co-ordination and task completion.
    [Show full text]
  • Speech-Language Pathologists' Assessment and Treatment of Dementia: a Mixed Methods Study Alyssa Mount University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected]
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Public Access Theses and Dissertations from the Education and Human Sciences, College of (CEHS) College of Education and Human Sciences 7-2019 Speech-Language Pathologists' Assessment and Treatment of Dementia: A Mixed Methods Study Alyssa Mount University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsdiss Part of the Other Education Commons Mount, Alyssa, "Speech-Language Pathologists' Assessment and Treatment of Dementia: A Mixed Methods Study" (2019). Public Access Theses and Dissertations from the College of Education and Human Sciences. 339. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsdiss/339 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Education and Human Sciences, College of (CEHS) at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Public Access Theses and Dissertations from the College of Education and Human Sciences by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Speech-Language Pathologists’ Assessment and Treatment of Dementia: A Mixed Methods Study by Alyssa L. Mount A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Master of Science Major: Speech Language Pathology and Audiology Under the Supervision of Professor Kristy Weissling Lincoln, Nebraska July, 2019 Speech-Language Pathologists’ Assessment and Treatment of Dementia: A Mixed Methods Study Alyssa Mount, M.S. University of Nebraska, 2019 Advisor: Kristy Weissling The intent of this research was to investigate how speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are assessing and treating people with dementia (PWD).
    [Show full text]
  • The Doors and People Test: the Effect of Frontal Lobe Lesions on Recall and Recognition Memory Performance
    Neuropsychology © 2016 The Author(s) 2016, Vol. 30, No. 3, 332–337 0894-4105/16/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/neu0000240 The Doors and People Test: The Effect of Frontal Lobe Lesions on Recall and Recognition Memory Performance Sarah E. MacPherson and Martha S. Turner Marco Bozzali University College London and National Hospital for Neurology University College London and IRCCS, Rome, Italy and Neurosurgery, London, United Kingdom Lisa Cipolotti Tim Shallice National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, University College London and SISSA, Trieste, Italy United Kingdom and University of Palermo Objective: Memory deficits in patients with frontal lobe lesions are most apparent on free recall tasks that require the selection, initiation, and implementation of retrieval strategies. The effect of frontal lesions on recognition memory performance is less clear with some studies reporting recognition memory impairments but others not. The majority of these studies do not directly compare recall and recognition within the same group of frontal patients, assessing only recall or recognition memory performance. Other studies that do compare recall and recognition in the same frontal group do not consider recall or recognition tests that are comparable for difficulty. Recognition memory impairments may not be reported because recognition memory tasks are less demanding. Method: This study aimed to investigate recall and recognition impairments in the same group of 47 frontal patients and 78 healthy controls. The Doors and People Test was administered as a neuropsychological test of memory as it assesses both verbal and visual recall and recognition using subtests that are matched for difficulty. Results: Significant verbal and visual recall and recognition impairments were found in the frontal patients.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018Almubark10454247phd.Pdf
    University of Plymouth PEARL https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk 04 University of Plymouth Research Theses 01 Research Theses Main Collection 2018 ASSESSING COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS IN ARABIC AND ENGLISH SPEAKING POPULATIONS Almubark, Bazah http://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/11119 University of Plymouth All content in PEARL is protected by copyright law. Author manuscripts are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author. This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with its author and that no quotation from the thesis and no information derived from it may be published without the author's prior consent. 1 ASSESSING COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS IN ARABIC AND ENGLISH SPEAKING POPULATIONS by BAZAH MAJED ALMUBARK A thesis submitted to Plymouth University in partial fulfilment of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Psychology Faculty of Health and Human Sciences March 2018 2 Acknowledgment I would like to express my deepest appreciation and sincere gratitude to my director of studies Dr. Caroline Floccia, who supported me throughout my PhD study. She continually provided me with supervision and help required for my PhD study and related researches. I am extremely lucky to have her as my director of studies and mentor. Without her guidance and persistent help this thesis would not have been possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Distinctive Cognitive Profiles in Alzheimer's Disease and Subcortical
    61 PAPER J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry: first published as on 5 January 2004. Downloaded from Distinctive cognitive profiles in Alzheimer’s disease and subcortical vascular dementia N L Graham, T Emery, J R Hodges ............................................................................................................................... See Editorial Commentary, p 4 J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2004;75:61–71 Background: There are inconsistencies in published reports regarding the profile of cognitive impairments in vascular dementia, and its differentiation from Alzheimer’s disease. Objectives: To identify the overall profile of cognitive impairment in subcortical vascular dementia as compared with Alzheimer’s disease; and the tests which best discriminate between these groups. Methods: 57 subjects participated: 19 with subcortical vascular dementia, 19 with Alzheimer’s disease, and 19 controls. The dementia groups were matched for age, education, and general levels of cognitive and everyday functioning. Subcortical vascular dementia was defined by clinical features (prominent See end of article for vascular risk factors plus a previous history of transient ischaemic events or focal neurological signs) and authors’ affiliations substantial white matter pathology on magnetic resonance imaging. All subjects were given a battery of ....................... 33 tests assessing episodic and semantic memory, executive/attentional functioning, and visuospatial and Correspondence to: perceptual skills. Professor John R Hodges, Results: Despite a minimal degree of overall dementia, both patient groups had impairments in all MRC-CBU, 15 Chaucer cognitive domains. The Alzheimer patients were more impaired than those with vascular dementia on Road, Cambridge CB2 2EF, UK; episodic memory, while the patients with vascular dementia were more impaired on semantic memory, john.hodges@mrc-cbu. executive/attentional functioning, and visuospatial and perceptual skills.
    [Show full text]
  • An Assessment of Cognition in Healthy Individuals to Inform The
    An Assessment of Cognition in Healthy Individuals to Inform the Assessment of Cognition in Transient Ischemic Attack Patients Danielle Lambert June 2017 Research submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor in Clinical Psychology (DClinPsy), Royal Holloway, University of London. 1 Abstract It is known that people can suffer from cognitive impairments following a TIA. Yet, currently, the methods for measuring this impairment are not very accurate or feasible. Whilst there is a gold standard battery to test for cognitive impairment, there are no up-to-date cohesive UK norms. Furthermore, current screening tools, it has been shown, have ceiling effects, and they are not sensitive in detecting mild cognitive impairments seen in a TIA profile. This study aims to explore whether a brief battery (BICAMS), which is used in MS could be an improvement on current tools. The sensitivity and specificity of the BICAMS were compared with a gold standard measure of cognitive impairment in TIA (NINDS-VCI; Hachinski et al., 2006). Furthermore, the study develops cohesive UK norms for the full NINDS-VCI battery to determine whether these would provide different outcomes to the available norm sources. Sixty-seven healthy UK participants were recruited to complete a 90-minute battery of tests – the MoCA, MMSE, BICAMS and NINDS-VCI 60-minute battery and a measure of estimated IQ, fatigue, anxiety and depression. Different norm sources were compared for the NINDS-VCI battery (published and current study). The numbers of participants falling below the expected level on the NINDS-VCI battery were compared with those identified by the three different screening tools.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Neuropsychology and Rehabilitation Brochure
    Neuropsychology and Rehabilitation Focusing on individual needs in the home, the community and wider society pearsonclinical.co.uk i Welcome to our Neuropsychology and Rehabilitation brochure: As the UK’s leading publisher of standardised assessments you can depend on our easy-to-use, well-researched assessments to help you identify cognitive impairments and assist you in the evaluation of your clients; helping you to plan intervention strategies and enhance your evidence-based practice. On the following pages you can navigate through our neuropsychology and rehabilitation decision-tree to explore our portfolio of assessments, interventions and training tools that focus on: general cognition, memory, executive function, speech, language and communication, independent living and adaptive behaviour, motor/visual-motor skills, and social-emotional needs. With the power of our comprehensive digital system Q-interactive®, you can streamline the entire assessment process of some of our popular titles such as the; WAIS–IVUK, WMS-IVUK, CVLT- IIUK and the D-KEFS. Create client profiles, choose and develop batteries, and review scored data through a secure web-portal. Visit our website to view our full range of assessments and tools for both adults and children. pearsonclinical.co.uk XXXXXXX ii ® Q-interactive One System, two tablets, tons of Power Leading the way in digital assessment. Q-interactive® is a comprehensive digital system, which lets you create unique, client-centric batteries quickly, at both the instrument and subtest levels. It also improves administration accuracy and speed, provides real time scoring, and allows for unheard of flexibility in just a few simple taps. Via Q-interactive® you can administer tests through the use of two digital tablets that “talk” to each other via Bluetooth® connection.
    [Show full text]