Cargando…

Validating virtual administration of neuropsychological testing in Parkinson disease: a pilot study

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has highlighted the need for remote cognitive testing. Virtual testing may lessen burden and can reach a larger patient population. The reliability and validity of virtual cognitive testing in Parkinson disease (PD) is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To validate neuropsychological tests fo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weintraub, Daniel, Gallagher, Julia, Mamikonyan, Eugenia, Xie, Sharon, Tran, Baochan, Shaw, Sarah
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Journal Experts 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9934782/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36798341
http://dx.doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2472426/v1
_version_ 1784889948263940096
author Weintraub, Daniel
Gallagher, Julia
Mamikonyan, Eugenia
Xie, Sharon
Tran, Baochan
Shaw, Sarah
author_facet Weintraub, Daniel
Gallagher, Julia
Mamikonyan, Eugenia
Xie, Sharon
Tran, Baochan
Shaw, Sarah
author_sort Weintraub, Daniel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has highlighted the need for remote cognitive testing. Virtual testing may lessen burden and can reach a larger patient population. The reliability and validity of virtual cognitive testing in Parkinson disease (PD) is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To validate neuropsychological tests for virtual administration in PD. METHODS: Participants enrolled in an observational, cognition-focused study completed a rater-administered cognitive battery in-person and via video conference 3–7 days apart. Order of administration was counterbalanced. Analyses to compare performance by type of administration (virtual versus in-person) included paired t-test, intraclass correlation (ICC) and linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Data for 35 (62.9% male) PD participants (62.5% normal cognition, 37.5% cognitive impairment) were analyzed. Only the semantic verbal fluency test demonstrated a difference in score by administration type, with a significantly better score when administered virtually (paired t-test p = 0.011 and linear mixed-effects model p = 0.012). Only the Dementia Rating Scale-2, Trails A test and phonemic verbal fluency demonstrated good reliability (ICC value 0.75–0.90) for virtual versus in-person administration, and values for visit 1 versus visit 2 were similarly low overall. Trail making tests were successfully administered virtually to only 18 (51.4%) participants due to technical issues. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual cognitive testing overall is feasible in PD, and virtual and in-person cognitive testing generate similar scores at the group level, but reliability is poor or moderate for most tests. Given that mode of test administration, learning effects and technical dificulties explained relatively little of the low test-retest reliability observed, there may be significant short-term variability in cognitive performance in PD in general, which has important implications for clinical care and research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9934782
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher American Journal Experts
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99347822023-02-17 Validating virtual administration of neuropsychological testing in Parkinson disease: a pilot study Weintraub, Daniel Gallagher, Julia Mamikonyan, Eugenia Xie, Sharon Tran, Baochan Shaw, Sarah Res Sq Article BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has highlighted the need for remote cognitive testing. Virtual testing may lessen burden and can reach a larger patient population. The reliability and validity of virtual cognitive testing in Parkinson disease (PD) is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To validate neuropsychological tests for virtual administration in PD. METHODS: Participants enrolled in an observational, cognition-focused study completed a rater-administered cognitive battery in-person and via video conference 3–7 days apart. Order of administration was counterbalanced. Analyses to compare performance by type of administration (virtual versus in-person) included paired t-test, intraclass correlation (ICC) and linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Data for 35 (62.9% male) PD participants (62.5% normal cognition, 37.5% cognitive impairment) were analyzed. Only the semantic verbal fluency test demonstrated a difference in score by administration type, with a significantly better score when administered virtually (paired t-test p = 0.011 and linear mixed-effects model p = 0.012). Only the Dementia Rating Scale-2, Trails A test and phonemic verbal fluency demonstrated good reliability (ICC value 0.75–0.90) for virtual versus in-person administration, and values for visit 1 versus visit 2 were similarly low overall. Trail making tests were successfully administered virtually to only 18 (51.4%) participants due to technical issues. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual cognitive testing overall is feasible in PD, and virtual and in-person cognitive testing generate similar scores at the group level, but reliability is poor or moderate for most tests. Given that mode of test administration, learning effects and technical dificulties explained relatively little of the low test-retest reliability observed, there may be significant short-term variability in cognitive performance in PD in general, which has important implications for clinical care and research. American Journal Experts 2023-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9934782/ /pubmed/36798341 http://dx.doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2472426/v1 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
spellingShingle Article
Weintraub, Daniel
Gallagher, Julia
Mamikonyan, Eugenia
Xie, Sharon
Tran, Baochan
Shaw, Sarah
Validating virtual administration of neuropsychological testing in Parkinson disease: a pilot study
title Validating virtual administration of neuropsychological testing in Parkinson disease: a pilot study
title_full Validating virtual administration of neuropsychological testing in Parkinson disease: a pilot study
title_fullStr Validating virtual administration of neuropsychological testing in Parkinson disease: a pilot study
title_full_unstemmed Validating virtual administration of neuropsychological testing in Parkinson disease: a pilot study
title_short Validating virtual administration of neuropsychological testing in Parkinson disease: a pilot study
title_sort validating virtual administration of neuropsychological testing in parkinson disease: a pilot study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9934782/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36798341
http://dx.doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2472426/v1
work_keys_str_mv AT weintraubdaniel validatingvirtualadministrationofneuropsychologicaltestinginparkinsondiseaseapilotstudy
AT gallagherjulia validatingvirtualadministrationofneuropsychologicaltestinginparkinsondiseaseapilotstudy
AT mamikonyaneugenia validatingvirtualadministrationofneuropsychologicaltestinginparkinsondiseaseapilotstudy
AT xiesharon validatingvirtualadministrationofneuropsychologicaltestinginparkinsondiseaseapilotstudy
AT tranbaochan validatingvirtualadministrationofneuropsychologicaltestinginparkinsondiseaseapilotstudy
AT shawsarah validatingvirtualadministrationofneuropsychologicaltestinginparkinsondiseaseapilotstudy