Search

Aims: Visuospatial skills are frequently assessed with drawing tests. Research has suggested that the use of drawing tasks in low educated groups may lack the ability to discriminate healthy individuals from clinical populations. The aims of this study were to investigate the validity of visuoconstructional tests in a sample of older Greek Australian immigrants and compare their performances to a matched sample of patients with Alzheimer's disease (ad)., Method: We assessed visuoconstructional performances in a sample of 90 healthy older Greek Australians, with a primary school level of education, and compared performances to a demographically matched sample of 20 Greek Australians with a diagnosis of ad on four visuoconstructional drawing tests: Greek cross, four-pointed star, intersecting pentagons, and the Necker Cube., Results: While healthy participants tended to outperform the ad group on most copy tasks, high fail rates within the healthy sample were observed for the intersecting pentagons and Necker cube (78% and 73% fail rates, respectively) when using established clinical cut-off scores. High rates of curved angle, omission, distorted relation between elements, spatial disorganization and three-dimensional design errors were found across the four-pointed star, intersecting pentagons, and the Necker cube in both healthy participants and those with ad. Exploratory receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that, with perhaps the exception of the Greek cross, meaningful sensitivity and specificity could not be reached for the four-pointed star, intersecting pentagons, and Necker cube., Conclusion: Cognitively healthy immigrants with low education appear to be at a disadvantage when completing visuoconstructional drawing tests, as their performance may be misinterpreted as indicating cognitive impairment. Future research is needed to identify alternative approaches to assess visuoconstructional ability in culturally and linguistically diverse older cohorts with limited education., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Two parallel versions (A and B) of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS) were developed in the United Kingdom (UK) as a stroke-specific screen of five key cognitive domains commonly affected post-stroke. We aimed to develop the Australian versions A and B (OCS-AU), including Australian cut-scores indicative of impairment. We hypothesised there to be no difference in performance between the UK and Australian normative data cohorts., Methods: Our multidisciplinary expert panel used the UK pre-defined process to develop the OCS-AU versions A and B. We then conducted a cross-sectional normative study. We purposively recruited community-dwelling, Australian-born, and educated adults; with no known cognitive impairment; representative of age, sex, education level, and living location; at seven sites (four metropolitan, three regional) across four Australian states. Participants completed one or both OCS-AU versions in a randomised order. Australian cohorts were compared with the corresponding UK cohorts for demographics using Pearson's chi-squared test for sex and education, and Welch two-sample t test for age. For the cut-scores indicating cognitive impairment, the fifth (95th) percentiles and group mean performance score for each scored item were compared using Welch two-sample t tests. The pre-defined criteria for retaining OCS cut-scores had no statistically significant difference in either percentile or group mean scores for each scored item., Results: Participants (n = 83) were recruited: fifty-eight completed version A [age (years) mean = 61,SD = 15; 62% female], 60 completed version B [age (years) mean = 62,SD = 13, 53% female], and 35 completed both [age (years) mean = 64,SD = 11, 54% female]. Education was different between the cohorts for version B (12 years, p = 0.002). Cut-scores for all 16 scored items for the OCS-AU version B and 15/16 for version A met our pre-defined criteria for retaining the OCS cut scores., Conclusions: The OCS-AU provides clinicians with an Australian-specific, first-line cognitive screening tool for people after stroke. Early screening can guide treatment and management., (© 2022 The Authors. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Occupational Therapy Australia.)

Introduction: Videoconferencing may help address barriers associated with poor access to post-stroke cognitive screening. However, the equivalence of videoconference and face-to-face administrations of appropriate cognitive screening tools needs to be established. We compared face-to-face and videoconference administrations of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in community-based survivors of stroke. We also evaluated whether participant characteristics (e.g. age) influenced equivalence., Methods: We used a randomised crossover design (two-week interval). Participants were recruited through community advertising and use of a stroke-specific database. Both sessions were conducted by the same researcher in the same location. Videoconference sessions were conducted using Zoom. A repeated-measures t- test, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman plot and multivariate regression modelling were used to establish equivalence., Results: Forty-eight participants (26 men, M age  = 64.6 years, standard deviation ( SD ) = 10.1; M time since stroke  = 5.2 years, SD  = 4.0) completed the MoCA face-to-face and via videoconference on average 15.8 ( SD  = 9.7) days apart. Participants did not perform systematically better in a particular condition, and no participant variable predicted difference in MoCA performance. However, the ICC was low (0.615), and the Bland-Altman plot indicated wide limits of agreement, indicating variability between sessions., Discussion: Our findings provide preliminary evidence to support the use of videoconference to administer the MoCA following stroke. However, further research into the test-retest reliability of scores derived from the MoCA is needed in this population. Administering the MoCA via videoconference holds potential to ensure that all stroke survivors undergo cognitive screening, in line with recommended clinical practice.

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate whether cognition is associated with activity and participation outcomes in adult stroke survivors. Five databases were systematically searched for studies investigating the relationship between general- and domain-specific cognition and longer-term (>3 months) basic activities of daily living (ADL), instrumental ADLs, and participation outcomes. Eligibility for inclusion, data extraction, and study quality was evaluated by 2 reviewers using a standardized protocol. Effect sizes ( r ) were estimated using a random-effects model. Sixty-two publications were retained for review, comprising 7817 stroke survivors (median age 63.57 years, range:18-96 years). Median length of follow-up was 12 months (range: 3 months-11 years). Cognition (all domains combined) demonstrated a significant medium association with all 3 functional outcomes combined, r =0.37 (95% CI, 0.33-0.41), P <0.001. Moderator analyses revealed these effects persisted regardless of study quality, order in which outcomes were collected (sequential versus concurrent), age, sample size, or follow-up period. Small to medium associations were also identified between each individual cognitive domain and the separate ADL, instrumental ADL, and participation outcomes. In conclusion, poststroke cognitive impairment is associated with early and enduring activity limitations and participation restrictions, and the association is robust to study design factors, such as sample size, participant age, follow-up period, or study quality. Cognitive assessment early poststroke is recommended to facilitate early detection of disability, prediction of functional outcomes, and to inform tailored rehabilitation therapies.

This study aimed to examine discrepancies in the reporting of post-stroke functioning between stroke survivors and their clinicians across various disability domains and across current and predicted functioning. Fifty sub-acute stroke survivors (Age M  = 70.30 SD  = 15.80, 56% female) and their occupational therapist independently completed three measures assessing activity limitations (cognitive, physical, instrumental) and participation restrictions. Assessments were made of current functioning and predicted functioning at three months' post-discharge. Compared to physical functioning, appraisal discrepancies were more pronounced for cognitive functioning, instrumental activity limitation, and participation restriction. Discrepancies were more pronounced for current, as opposed to predicted, cognitive functioning ( Z  = -4.21, p  < .001) and instrumental activity limitation ( Z  = -4.00, p  < .001). Conversely, discrepancies in participation restriction were greatest for predicted functioning ( Z  = -4.03, p  < .001). Follow-up ( n  = 39) showed that, compared to survivors' predictions, clinicians' predictions were more closely aligned with actual stroke survivor functioning at three months' post-discharge (as rated by a close other). These findings suggest appraisal discrepancy varies across disability domains and time reference points, with cognitive and complex functional activities being particularly discrepant between stroke survivors and clinicians. Furthermore, clinicians may hold more realistic expectations of short-term functional recovery.

Computerised cognitive training (CCT) approaches to memory rehabilitation represent an attractive alternative to traditional approaches; however, there is limited empirical evidence to support their use. An AB with follow up single case design was repeated across five participants to explore the feasibility and effectiveness of CCT on subjective memory in patients with stroke. Target behaviour was subjective everyday and prospective memory failures which were assessed weekly. Following baseline (three weeks), participants completed six weeks of Lumosity TM training in their homes. Data were analysed visually and statistically. The frequency of prospective memory failures decreased during intervention for one participant, while the frequency of prospective and everyday memory failures decreased significantly during the follow up period for another participant. Yet, significantly more everyday and prospective memory failures were reported following training by one study participant. No significant change in subjective memory ratings was found for remaining participants. Regarding secondary outcomes, meaningful changes on objective measures of memory were not observed, despite considerable inter-individual variability. Three participants reported improvement in individualised memory goals, while two participants described a decline. Overall, Lumosity TM training appears feasible; however, no consistent evidence to support effectiveness of this CCT on subjective or objective memory was found.

Introduction: While cognitive impairment is a recognised feature of Parkinson's disease (PD), few studies have evaluated the validity of brief cognitive screening measures compared to a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment. This studies aim was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Modified Mini-Mental State Examination and Dementia Rating Scale (DRS-2) to detect cognitive impairment in individuals with PD., Method: Fifty-eight participants were administered the MMSE, 3MS, DRS-2 and a neuropsychological battery. ROC analyses were conducted to assess their effectiveness in classifying cognitive impairment., Results: None of the three measures demonstrated good sensitivity or specificity to detect single domain cognitive impairment. For detecting impairment on two or more cognitive domains, the MMSE and DRS-2 yielded excellent sensitivity (88%) and specificity (78% and 76% respectively), at cut-off scores of 28 and 136 respectively. The 3MS demonstrated excellent sensitivity (88%) and good specificity (60%) at cut off score of 94., Conclusion: The MMSE and DRS-2 have excellent discriminant ability to classify multi-domain cognitive impairment in PD, however, their ability to detect more focal cognitive impairment is limited. Given that focal domain may be an indicator that could be useful in early detection of cognitive impairment for people with PD, this finding has implication for the use of these measures as screening tools in clinical practice.