Dataset Information

Current Update on the Clinical Utility of MMSE and MoCA for Stroke Patients in Asia: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Primary care clinicians in Asia employed the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) to aid dementia diagnosis post-stroke. Recent studies questioned their clinical utility in stroke settings for relying on verbal abilities and education level, as well as lack of consideration for aphasia and neglect. We aimed to review the clinical utility of the MMSE and MoCA for stroke patients in Asia and provide recommendations for clinical practice.

Methods

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Science Direct were searched for relevant articles. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias. RevMan 5.4 was used for data synthesis (sensitivity and specificity) and covariates were identified.

Results

Among the 48 full-text articles reviewed, 11 studies were included with 3735 total subjects; of these studies, 7 (77%) were conducted in China, 3 (27%) in Singapore, and 1 (9%) in South Korea. Both the MMSE and MoCA generally showed adequate sensitivity and specificity. Education was identified as a covariate that significantly affected detection accuracy. Due to heterogeneity in cutoff scores, methodologies, and languages, it was not feasible to suggest a single cutoff score. One additional point is recommended for MoCA for patients with <6 years of education.

Conclusion

Clinicians in Asia are strongly recommended to consider the education level of stroke patients when interpreting the results of the MMSE and MoCA. Further studies in other Asian countries are needed to understand their clinical value in stroke settings.

SUBMITTER: Khaw J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8431226 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesWe sought to estimate reliable change thresholds for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for older adults with suspected Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus (iNPH). Furthermore, we aimed to determine the likelihood that shunted patients will demonstrate significant improvement on the MoCA, and to identify possible predictors of this improvement.MethodsPatients (N = 224) presenting with symptoms of iNPH were given a MoCA assessment at their first clinic visit, and also before and after tap test (TT) or extended lumbar drainage (ELD). Patients who were determined to be good candidates for shunts (N = 71, 31.7%) took another MoCA assessment following shunt insertion. Reliable change thresholds for MoCA were derived using baseline visit to pre-TT/ELD assessment using nine different methodologies. Baseline characteristics of patients whose post-shunt MoCA did and did not exceed the reliable change threshold were compared.ResultsAll nine of reliable change methods indicated that a 5-point increase in MoCA would be reliable for patients with a baseline MoCA from 16 to 22 (38.4% of patients). Furthermore, a majority of reliable change methods indicated that a 5-point increase in MoCA would be reliable for patients with a baseline MoCA from 14 to 25. Reliable change thresholds varied across methods from 4 to 7 points for patients outside of this range. 10.1% had at least a 5-point increase from baseline to post-TT/ELD. Compared to patients who did not receive a shunt, patients who received a shunt did not have lower average MoCA at baseline (p = 0.88) or have better improvement in MoCA scores after the tap test (p = 0.17). Among shunted patients, 23.4% improved by at least 5 points on the MoCA from baseline to post-shunt. Time since onset of memory problems and post-TT/ELD gait function were the only clinical factors significantly associated with having a reliable change in MoCA after shunt insertion (p = 0.019; p = 0.03, respectively).ConclusionsIn patients with iNPH, clinicians could consider using a threshold of 5 points for determining whether iNPH-symptomatic patients have experienced cognitive benefits from cerebrospinal fluid drainage at an individual level. However, a reliable change cannot be detected for patients with a baseline MoCA of 26 or greater, necessitating a different cognitive assessment tool for these patients.

Project description:BackgroundMild cognitive impairment (MCI) is at least as prevalent as dementia after transient ischaemic attack (TIA)/stroke and is increasingly recognised as an important outcome in observational studies and randomised trials. However, there is no consensus on how impairment should be defined, and numerous different criteria exist. Previous studies have shown that different criteria for cognitive impairment impact on prevalence rates in epidemiological studies. However, there are few data on how operational differences within established criteria (e.g. Petersen-MCI) affect measured impairment rates and the performance of short cognitive tests such as the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), particularly in cerebrovascular disease. We therefore evaluated the effect of different operational definitions on measured rates of Petersen-MCI and on reliability of short cognitive tests in patients with TIA and stroke.MethodsConsecutive patients underwent the MMSE, MoCA and neuropsychological battery ?1 year after TIA or stroke in a population-based study. MCI was defined using the Petersen method and subclassified as single or multiple domain, both with (original) and without (modified) subjective memory impairment. Different cut-offs (>1, >1.5 and >2 standard deviations, SD) on a given test relative to published norms were compared together with use of single versus multiple tests to define domain impairment.Results91 non-demented subjects completed neuropsychological testing (mean age ± SD 69.7 ± 11.6 years, 54 male, 49 stroke) at a mean of 3.1 ± 1.9 years after the index event. Rates of cognitive impairment ranged from 14/91 (15%) for MCI-original at >2 SD cut-off to 61/91 (67%) MCI-modified at >1 SD cut-off, and the proportion of MCI that was multiple domain varied, e.g. 24/46 (52%) versus only 5/27 (20%) at 1 versus 2 SD cut-off for MCI-modified. Requirement for subjective memory complaint approximately halved estimates [e.g. 17 (19%) vs. 39 (43%) for MCI at 1.5 SD cut-off, single test definition], whereas use of multiple tests versus a single test to define a cognitive domain had less impact. In general, diagnostic accuracy was higher, and optimal cut-offs lower, on MMSE and MoCA for multiple-domain versus single-domain MCI, but the MoCA appeared superior for detecting MCI-modified, whereas the MMSE performed well in detecting MCI-original.ConclusionEven within established criteria for MCI, differences in operational methodology result in 4-fold variation in MCI estimates. Optimal MMSE and MoCA cut-offs are lower, and reliability more similar, when criteria for MCI are more stringent. Our findings have implications for sample size and adjusted relative risk calculations in randomised trials and for comparisons between studies.

Project description:Stroke genetics includes several topics of clinical interest, including (1) molecular genetic variations affecting risk of monogenic stroke syndromes; (2) molecular genetic variations affecting risk of common stroke syndromes, sometimes with specific effects on risk of specific main types of stroke or subtypes of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke; (3) genetics of conditions associated with stroke risk e.g. white matter hyperintensities, atrial fibrillation and hypertension; (4) hereditary causes of familial aggregation of stroke; (5) epigenetic impact on protein expression during acute brain injury; (6) genetic influence on stroke recovery; and (7) pharmacogenetics. Genetic research methods include candidate gene studies; Genome Wide Association Studies; family studies; RNA and protein analyses; and advanced computer-aided analytical methods to detect statistically significant associations. Several methods that could improve our knowledge of stroke genetics are being developed e.g.: Exome content analysis; Next-generation sequencing; Whole genome sequencing; and Epigenetics. During 2012-2014, several Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) have been related to common ischemic stroke risk. Certain SNPs have been associated with risk of specific ischemic stroke subtypes such as large vessel disease and cardiac embolism, particular subtypes of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), especially lobar ICH, and with prognosis after ICH. Large international studies on stroke recovery and exome content are ongoing. Advanced mathematical models have been used to study how several SNPs can act together and increase stroke risk burden. Such efforts require large numbers of patients and controls, which is achieved by co-operation in large international consortia such as the International Stroke Genetics Consortium. This overview includes an introduction to genetics, stroke genetics in general, and different genetic variations that may influence stroke risk. It presents some of the latest reports on stroke genetics published in high impact journals. The role of pharmacogenetics, the current clinical situation, and future prospects will also be discussed.