Cargando…

Responsiveness, Minimal Clinically Important Difference, and Validity of the MoCA in Stroke Rehabilitation

OBJECTIVE: Persons with stroke frequently suffer from cognitive impairment. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a recently developed screening tool, is sensitive to poststroke cognitive deficits. The present study assessed its psychometric and clinimetric properties (i.e., responsiveness, mini...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wu, Ching-Yi, Hung, Shuan-Ju, Lin, Keh-chung, Chen, Kai-Hua, Chen, Poyu, Tsay, Pei-Kwei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6487084/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31097928
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/2517658
_version_ 1783414437377474560
author Wu, Ching-Yi
Hung, Shuan-Ju
Lin, Keh-chung
Chen, Kai-Hua
Chen, Poyu
Tsay, Pei-Kwei
author_facet Wu, Ching-Yi
Hung, Shuan-Ju
Lin, Keh-chung
Chen, Kai-Hua
Chen, Poyu
Tsay, Pei-Kwei
author_sort Wu, Ching-Yi
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Persons with stroke frequently suffer from cognitive impairment. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a recently developed screening tool, is sensitive to poststroke cognitive deficits. The present study assessed its psychometric and clinimetric properties (i.e., responsiveness, minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and criterion validity) in stroke survivors receiving rehabilitative therapy. METHOD: The MoCA and the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) were administered to 65 stroke survivors before and after 4 to 5 weeks of therapy. The effect size and standardized response mean (SRM) were calculated for responsiveness. Anchor- and distribution-based methods were used to estimate the MCID. Criterion validity was measured with the Spearman correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The responsiveness of the MoCA was moderate (SRM = 0.67). Participants exceeding the MCID according to the anchor- and distribution-based approaches were 33 (50.77%) and 20 (30.77%), respectively. Fair to good concurrent validity was reported between the MoCA and the SIS communication subscale. The MoCA had satisfactory predictive validity with the SIS communication and memory subscales. CONCLUSION: This study may support the responsiveness, MCID, and criterion validity of the MoCA in stroke populations. Future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to validate the current findings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6487084
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64870842019-05-16 Responsiveness, Minimal Clinically Important Difference, and Validity of the MoCA in Stroke Rehabilitation Wu, Ching-Yi Hung, Shuan-Ju Lin, Keh-chung Chen, Kai-Hua Chen, Poyu Tsay, Pei-Kwei Occup Ther Int Research Article OBJECTIVE: Persons with stroke frequently suffer from cognitive impairment. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a recently developed screening tool, is sensitive to poststroke cognitive deficits. The present study assessed its psychometric and clinimetric properties (i.e., responsiveness, minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and criterion validity) in stroke survivors receiving rehabilitative therapy. METHOD: The MoCA and the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) were administered to 65 stroke survivors before and after 4 to 5 weeks of therapy. The effect size and standardized response mean (SRM) were calculated for responsiveness. Anchor- and distribution-based methods were used to estimate the MCID. Criterion validity was measured with the Spearman correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The responsiveness of the MoCA was moderate (SRM = 0.67). Participants exceeding the MCID according to the anchor- and distribution-based approaches were 33 (50.77%) and 20 (30.77%), respectively. Fair to good concurrent validity was reported between the MoCA and the SIS communication subscale. The MoCA had satisfactory predictive validity with the SIS communication and memory subscales. CONCLUSION: This study may support the responsiveness, MCID, and criterion validity of the MoCA in stroke populations. Future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to validate the current findings. Hindawi 2019-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6487084/ /pubmed/31097928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/2517658 Text en Copyright © 2019 Ching-Yi Wu et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Wu, Ching-Yi
Hung, Shuan-Ju
Lin, Keh-chung
Chen, Kai-Hua
Chen, Poyu
Tsay, Pei-Kwei
Responsiveness, Minimal Clinically Important Difference, and Validity of the MoCA in Stroke Rehabilitation
title Responsiveness, Minimal Clinically Important Difference, and Validity of the MoCA in Stroke Rehabilitation
title_full Responsiveness, Minimal Clinically Important Difference, and Validity of the MoCA in Stroke Rehabilitation
title_fullStr Responsiveness, Minimal Clinically Important Difference, and Validity of the MoCA in Stroke Rehabilitation
title_full_unstemmed Responsiveness, Minimal Clinically Important Difference, and Validity of the MoCA in Stroke Rehabilitation
title_short Responsiveness, Minimal Clinically Important Difference, and Validity of the MoCA in Stroke Rehabilitation
title_sort responsiveness, minimal clinically important difference, and validity of the moca in stroke rehabilitation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6487084/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31097928
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/2517658
work_keys_str_mv AT wuchingyi responsivenessminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceandvalidityofthemocainstrokerehabilitation
AT hungshuanju responsivenessminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceandvalidityofthemocainstrokerehabilitation
AT linkehchung responsivenessminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceandvalidityofthemocainstrokerehabilitation
AT chenkaihua responsivenessminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceandvalidityofthemocainstrokerehabilitation
AT chenpoyu responsivenessminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceandvalidityofthemocainstrokerehabilitation
AT tsaypeikwei responsivenessminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceandvalidityofthemocainstrokerehabilitation