Search

Aims: To examine the diagnostic utility of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the Canadian Stroke Network (NINDS-CSN) neuropsychological battery in memory clinics comparing controls with patients with no cognitive impairment (NCI), patients with cognitive impairment-no dementia (CIND) at varying severity levels (mild/moderate), and patients with dementia. Methods: A total of 405 participants with NCI, CIND or dementia were assessed with the NINDS-CSN battery. The discriminatory properties of all three protocols (5, 30 and 60 min) before and after education stratification (none/primary vs. secondary/above) were examined by receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: Overall, the shorter protocols are equivalent to the longer protocol in diagnosing dementia, regardless of education. To discriminate between nondementia groups, before education stratification, the 5-min protocol showed varied discriminatory properties between different diagnostic/severity groups. After stratification, the 5-min protocol was broadly equivalent to the longer protocols in lower-education groups [area under the curve (AUC) range: 0.77-0.87] but was less accurate in the higher-education groups (AUC range: 0.68-0.78). The 30- and 60-min protocol constantly showed moderate-to-excellent differentiating capacities regardless of education (AUC range: 0.80-0.90). Conclusion: The NINDS-CSN neuropsychological battery can be applied in memory clinics and effectively discriminate between cognitively intact individuals and those with cognitive impairments of varying severity. Furthermore, level of education should be taken into consideration when choosing protocols with different lengths for cognitive assessment.

Objectives. The utility of informant AD8 for case finding of cognitive impairment at primary healthcare settings is unknown and therefore its feasibility and acceptability for targeted screening at a primary healthcare clinic should be investigated. Methods. The informants of older adult patients attending a primary healthcare clinic in Singapore were administered the AD8. Positive screening findings were provided to patients’ primary care physicians for referrals to specialist memory clinics. The acceptability of AD8 was evaluated by collecting feedbacks from the informants and primary care physicians. Results. 205 patients and their informants were recruited. However, 6 (2.9%) informants were uncontactable, while the majority of the remaining 199 patients with completed AD8 (96.5%, n=192) found it acceptable where 59 (29.6%) patients were deemed cognitively impaired (AD8 ≥ 2). Clinicians (100%, n=5) found the AD8 helpful in facilitating referrals to memory clinics. However, most referral recommendations (81.4%, n=48) were declined by patients and/or informant due to limited insight of implications of cognitive impairment. Conclusions. The AD8 can be easily administered and is well tolerated. It detected cognitive impairment in one-third of older adult patients and therefore may be useful for case finding of cognitive impairment in the primary healthcare.