Cargando…
Screening for Cognitive Frailty Using Short Cognitive Screening Instruments: Comparison of the Chinese Versions of the MoCA and Qmci Screen
BACKGROUND: Cognitive frailty describes cognitive impairment associated with physical decline. Few studies have explored whether short cognitive screens identify frailty. We examined the diagnostic accuracy of the Chinese versions of the Quick Mild Cognitive Impairment (Qmci-CN) screen and Montreal...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7145973/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32308636 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00558 |
_version_ | 1783520097507213312 |
---|---|
author | Xu, Yangfan Lin, Yangyang Yi, Lingrong Li, Zhao Li, Xian Yu, Yuying Guo, Yuxiao Wang, Yuling Jiang, Haoying Chen, Zhuoming Svendrovski, Anton Gao, Yang Molloy, D. William O’Caoimh, Rónán |
author_facet | Xu, Yangfan Lin, Yangyang Yi, Lingrong Li, Zhao Li, Xian Yu, Yuying Guo, Yuxiao Wang, Yuling Jiang, Haoying Chen, Zhuoming Svendrovski, Anton Gao, Yang Molloy, D. William O’Caoimh, Rónán |
author_sort | Xu, Yangfan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Cognitive frailty describes cognitive impairment associated with physical decline. Few studies have explored whether short cognitive screens identify frailty. We examined the diagnostic accuracy of the Chinese versions of the Quick Mild Cognitive Impairment (Qmci-CN) screen and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-CN) in identifying cognitive frailty. METHODS: Ninety-five participants with cognitive symptoms [47 with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 34 with subjective cognitive disorder, and 14 with dementia] were included from two outpatient rehabilitation clinics. Energy (work intensity) and physical activity levels were recorded. Cognitive frailty was diagnosed by an interdisciplinary team using the IANA/IAGG consensus criteria, stratified on the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Instruments were administered sequentially and randomly by trained assessors, blind to the diagnosis. RESULTS: The mean age of the sample was 62.6 ± 10.2 years; median CFS score was 4 ± 1 and 36 (38%) were cognitively frail. The Qmci-CN had similar accuracy in differentiating the non-frail from cognitively frail compared to the MoCA-CN, AUC 0.82 versus 0.74, respectively (p = 0.19). At its optimal cut-off (≤55/100), the Qmci-CN provided a sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 67% versus 91% and 51%, respectively, for the MoCA-CN (≤23/30). Neither was accurate in separating MCI from cognitive frailty but both accurately separated cognitive frailty from dementia. CONCLUSION: Established short cognitive screens may be useful in identifying cognitive frailty in Chinese adults with cognitive complaints but not in separating MCI from cognitive frailty. The Qmci-CN had similar accuracy to the MoCA-CN and a shorter administration time in this small and under-powered study, necessitating the need for adequately powered studies in different healthcare settings. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7145973 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71459732020-04-18 Screening for Cognitive Frailty Using Short Cognitive Screening Instruments: Comparison of the Chinese Versions of the MoCA and Qmci Screen Xu, Yangfan Lin, Yangyang Yi, Lingrong Li, Zhao Li, Xian Yu, Yuying Guo, Yuxiao Wang, Yuling Jiang, Haoying Chen, Zhuoming Svendrovski, Anton Gao, Yang Molloy, D. William O’Caoimh, Rónán Front Psychol Psychology BACKGROUND: Cognitive frailty describes cognitive impairment associated with physical decline. Few studies have explored whether short cognitive screens identify frailty. We examined the diagnostic accuracy of the Chinese versions of the Quick Mild Cognitive Impairment (Qmci-CN) screen and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-CN) in identifying cognitive frailty. METHODS: Ninety-five participants with cognitive symptoms [47 with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 34 with subjective cognitive disorder, and 14 with dementia] were included from two outpatient rehabilitation clinics. Energy (work intensity) and physical activity levels were recorded. Cognitive frailty was diagnosed by an interdisciplinary team using the IANA/IAGG consensus criteria, stratified on the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Instruments were administered sequentially and randomly by trained assessors, blind to the diagnosis. RESULTS: The mean age of the sample was 62.6 ± 10.2 years; median CFS score was 4 ± 1 and 36 (38%) were cognitively frail. The Qmci-CN had similar accuracy in differentiating the non-frail from cognitively frail compared to the MoCA-CN, AUC 0.82 versus 0.74, respectively (p = 0.19). At its optimal cut-off (≤55/100), the Qmci-CN provided a sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 67% versus 91% and 51%, respectively, for the MoCA-CN (≤23/30). Neither was accurate in separating MCI from cognitive frailty but both accurately separated cognitive frailty from dementia. CONCLUSION: Established short cognitive screens may be useful in identifying cognitive frailty in Chinese adults with cognitive complaints but not in separating MCI from cognitive frailty. The Qmci-CN had similar accuracy to the MoCA-CN and a shorter administration time in this small and under-powered study, necessitating the need for adequately powered studies in different healthcare settings. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-04-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7145973/ /pubmed/32308636 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00558 Text en Copyright © 2020 Xu, Lin, Yi, Li, Li, Yu, Guo, Wang, Jiang, Chen, Svendrovski, Gao, Molloy and O’Caoimh. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Xu, Yangfan Lin, Yangyang Yi, Lingrong Li, Zhao Li, Xian Yu, Yuying Guo, Yuxiao Wang, Yuling Jiang, Haoying Chen, Zhuoming Svendrovski, Anton Gao, Yang Molloy, D. William O’Caoimh, Rónán Screening for Cognitive Frailty Using Short Cognitive Screening Instruments: Comparison of the Chinese Versions of the MoCA and Qmci Screen |
title | Screening for Cognitive Frailty Using Short Cognitive Screening Instruments: Comparison of the Chinese Versions of the MoCA and Qmci Screen |
title_full | Screening for Cognitive Frailty Using Short Cognitive Screening Instruments: Comparison of the Chinese Versions of the MoCA and Qmci Screen |
title_fullStr | Screening for Cognitive Frailty Using Short Cognitive Screening Instruments: Comparison of the Chinese Versions of the MoCA and Qmci Screen |
title_full_unstemmed | Screening for Cognitive Frailty Using Short Cognitive Screening Instruments: Comparison of the Chinese Versions of the MoCA and Qmci Screen |
title_short | Screening for Cognitive Frailty Using Short Cognitive Screening Instruments: Comparison of the Chinese Versions of the MoCA and Qmci Screen |
title_sort | screening for cognitive frailty using short cognitive screening instruments: comparison of the chinese versions of the moca and qmci screen |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7145973/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32308636 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00558 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT xuyangfan screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT linyangyang screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT yilingrong screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT lizhao screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT lixian screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT yuyuying screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT guoyuxiao screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT wangyuling screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT jianghaoying screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT chenzhuoming screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT svendrovskianton screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT gaoyang screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT molloydwilliam screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen AT ocaoimhronan screeningforcognitivefrailtyusingshortcognitivescreeninginstrumentscomparisonofthechineseversionsofthemocaandqmciscreen |