We have located links that may give you full text access.
An assessment of Movement Disorder Society Task Force diagnostic criteria for mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease.
European Journal of Neurology 2018 January
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cognitive impairment is one of the most disabling non-motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease. Mild cognitive impairment constitutes a major risk for the development of Parkinson's disease dementia in the course of the disease. A Movement Disorder Society Task Force proposed diagnostic criteria for mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease (PD-MCI), comprising two operational levels: Level I and Level II. The objective of our study was to test the accuracy of Level I versus Level II diagnostic criteria.
METHODS: Eighty-six consecutive patients with Parkinson's disease were screened and 68 patients without dementia or depression were included in the study. We used the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Mini-Mental State Examination and Addenbrooke's Cognitive Evaluation-R screening tools for Level I and an extensive neuropsychological battery for Level II assessment. We first diagnosed PD-MCI on the basis of Level II assessment and then calculated sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver-operator characteristics curve, comparing the performance of the three screening batteries.
RESULTS: None of the three screening batteries proposed for Level I assessment provided satisfactory combined sensitivity and specificity for detecting PD-MCI, and their performance was similar. Using the Level II criteria, 29 patients (43%) were diagnosed as having PD-MCI. Lowest cut-off levels that provided at least 80% sensitivity were 24 for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, 29 for the Mini-Mental State Examination and 87 for the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Evaluation-R. However, specificity levels were below 80% at these cut-off levels.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that Level I assessment alone using screening batteries is not sufficiently sensitive/specific to detect PD-MCI.
METHODS: Eighty-six consecutive patients with Parkinson's disease were screened and 68 patients without dementia or depression were included in the study. We used the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Mini-Mental State Examination and Addenbrooke's Cognitive Evaluation-R screening tools for Level I and an extensive neuropsychological battery for Level II assessment. We first diagnosed PD-MCI on the basis of Level II assessment and then calculated sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver-operator characteristics curve, comparing the performance of the three screening batteries.
RESULTS: None of the three screening batteries proposed for Level I assessment provided satisfactory combined sensitivity and specificity for detecting PD-MCI, and their performance was similar. Using the Level II criteria, 29 patients (43%) were diagnosed as having PD-MCI. Lowest cut-off levels that provided at least 80% sensitivity were 24 for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, 29 for the Mini-Mental State Examination and 87 for the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Evaluation-R. However, specificity levels were below 80% at these cut-off levels.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that Level I assessment alone using screening batteries is not sufficiently sensitive/specific to detect PD-MCI.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app