Dataset Information

Subgroups Defined by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Differ in Functional Gain During Acute Inpatient Stroke Rehabilitation.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To validate subgroups of cognitive impairment on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)-defined as normal (score of 25-30), mildly impaired (score of 20-24), and moderately impaired (score less than 19)-by determining whether they differ in rehabilitation gain during inpatient stroke rehabilitation.

Design

Observational study. Linear regression models were conducted and predictors included MoCA subgroups and relevant baseline demographic and clinical covariates. Separate models included the cognitive subscale of the FIM instrument as a predictor.

Setting

Inpatient rehabilitation facility of an urban, academic medical center.

Participants

Inpatients (N=334) with mild-moderate strokes who were administered the MoCA on admission.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main outcome measures

The mean relative functional gain (mRFG) and mean relative functional efficiency (mRFE, which adjusts for length of stay) on the FIM total.

Results

MoCA subgroups significantly predicted mRFG and mRFE after accounting for age, sex, education, stroke severity, and recurrent vs first stroke. The normal group exhibited greater mRFG and mRFE than the mildly impaired group, while the moderately impaired group had significantly worse mRFG and mRFE than the mildly impaired group. The moderately impaired group had a significantly smaller proportion of individuals who made a clinically meaningful change on the total-FIM than the mildly impaired and normal groups. MoCA subgroups better accounted for mRFG and mRFE than a standard-of-care cognitive assessment (cognitive-FIM).

Conclusions

Use of MoCA-defined subgroups can assist providers in predicting functional gain in survivors of stroke being treated in inpatient rehabilitation.

SUBMITTER: Jaywant A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8075065 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Given advantages in reperfusion therapy leading to mild stroke, less apparent cognitive deficits can be overseen in a routine neurological examination. Despite the widespread use of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), age- and education-specific cutoffs for the detection of post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) are not established, hampering its valid application in stroke. We aimed to establish age- and education-specific MoCA cutoffs to better discriminate patients with and without acute PSCI. Patients with acute ischemic stroke underwent the MoCA and a detailed neuropsychological assessment. PSCI was defined as a performance < - 1.5 SD in ≥ 2 cognitive domains. As secondary data analysis, the discriminant abilities of the MoCAraw-score (not adding + 1 as correction for ≤ 12 years of education, YoE) cutoffs were automatically derived based on Youden Index and evaluated by receiver operating characteristic analyses across age- (< 55, 55-70, > 70 years old) and education-specific (≤ 12 and > 12 YoE) groups. 351 stroke patients (67.4 ± 14.1 years old; 13.1 ± 2.8 YoE) underwent the neuropsychological assessment 2.7 ± 2.0 days post-stroke. The original MoCA cutoff < 26 falsely classified 26.2% of examined patients, with poor sensitivity in younger adults (34.8% in patients < 55 years > 12 YoE) and poor specificity in older adults (55.0%, in > 70 years ≤ 12 YoE). By maximizing both sensitivity and specificity, the optimal MoCAraw cutoffs were: (i) < 28 in patients aged < 55 with > 12 YoE (sensitivity = 69.6%, specificity = 77.8%); (ii) < 22 and < 25 in patients > 70 years with ≤ 12 and > 12 YoE (sensitivity = 61.6%, specificity = 90.0%; sensitivity = 63.3%, specificity = 84.0%, respectively). In other groups the optimal MoCAraw cutoff was < 26. Age and education level should be considered when interpreting MoCA-scores. Though new age- and education-specific cutoffs demonstrated higher discriminant ability for PSCI, their performance in young stroke and adults with higher education level was low due to ceiling effects and MoCA subtests structure, and cautious interpretation in these patients is warranted.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05653141.

Project description:ObjectivesThe purpose of this exploratory study was to identify clinical predictors that could distinguish clients' level of engagement in inpatient rehabilitation following stroke.MethodsThis is a secondary analysis of pooled data from three randomized controlled trials that examined the effects of a behavioral intervention. The sample (n=208) consisted of clients with stroke who had cognitive deficits (Quick-EXIT≥3) and were admitted to inpatient rehabilitation facilities associated with a university medical center. Individuals with pre-morbid dementia, aphasia and mood disorders were excluded. The Pittsburgh Rehabilitation Participation Scale was used to measure engagement. Clinical predictors were measured using the Functional Independence Measure, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status, selected subtests of the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Chedoke McMaster Stroke Assessment. Simple logistic regression identified individual clinical predictors associated with engagement. Hierarchical logistic regression identified the strongest predictors of engagement.ResultsImpairments in executive functions [mean D-KEFS, odds ratio (OR)=4.062; 95% confidence interval (CI)=.866, 19.051], impairments in visuospatial skills (RBANS Visuospatial Index Score, OR=3.940; 95% CI=1.317, 11.785), impairments in mood (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, OR=2.059, 95% CI=.953, 4.449), and male gender (OR=2.474; 95% CI=1.145, 5.374) predicted levels of engagement in inpatient rehabilitation after controlling for study intervention group, baseline stroke severity, and baseline disability.ConclusionsExecutive functions, visuospatial skills, mood, and gender distinguished individuals with high or low engagement in inpatient rehabilitation following stroke. Further studies should examine additional factors that may influence engagement (therapist-client relationship, treatment expectancy). (JINS, 2018, 24, 572-583).