Evaluation of Two Practical Tools to Assess Cognitive Impairment in Aged Dogs

SIMPLE SUMMARY: The elderly pet population has increased dramatically in recent decades; consequently, the prevalence of age-related diseases, such as Cognitive Dysfunction Syndrome, has also increased. This syndrome is mainly characterized by cognitive impairment and behavioral changes related to it. The early diagnosis of this condition is important because the sooner treatment is implemented, the better the animal’s response. Diagnostic tools to detect cognitive decline may differ depending on the environment in which the animal lives. In this study, we describe two practical methods for assessing cognitive decline in different environments: (i) a canine cognitive assessment scale for dogs living in a domestic environment and (ii) a practical cognitive test for dogs not living in a domestic environment (e.g., shelters). We also evaluate the effect of age on the results of both tools and, finally, we compare their results. Both methods were found to be practical to perform and their results were related to the age of the animals. However, the results of the scale did not predict the outcome of the test. We suggest that the lack of relationship between test results and scale is probably related to the fact that each tool may be subject to different sources of variability and requires further investigation. ABSTRACT: Cognitive dysfunction syndrome is the most common cause of cognitive decline in aged dogs. Early diagnosis is crucial because the sooner treatment is implemented, the greater the chance of slowing the progression of the disease. Assessment tools to assess cognitive decline may differ depending on the environment in which the dogs live. The aims of this study were threefold, first, to describe two feasible methods to evaluate cognitive impairment in aged dogs living in different environments: (i) a Canine Cognitive Assessment Scale (CCAS) for dogs living in a home environment and (ii) a practical cognitive test (PCT) potentially useful for dogs not living in a home environment (NHE); second, to assess the effect of age on the outcome of both tools and, finally, to compare the results of the CCAS with those of the PCT. Both methods were found to be practical to perform. Age was found to significantly predict the score obtained by the CCAS (p = 0.0011) and the outcome of the PCT (p = 0.009). However, the reversal phase from the PCT did not significantly predict the outcomes of the CCAS (p = 0.97). Taken together, these findings suggest that the CCAS is a practical method to evaluate age related cognitive changes in owned dogs. The fact that the PCT has not been proven to be related with the CCAS calls into question the use of the PCT as a sensitive tool to assess cognitive impairment. Further studies in this field are suggested.