OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that hot flashes specifically relate to verbal memory performance by examining the relationship between objective hot flashes and cognitive test performance in women with moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms. DESIGN: In an observational study, 29 midlife women (mean age, 53 y) with moderate to severe hot flashes provided measures of objective hot flashes with an ambulatory hot flash monitor, subjective hot flashes with a diary and questionnaire, and objective measures of verbal memory and other cognitive functions with standardized neuropsychological tests. RESULTS: The mean number of objective hot flashes was 19.5 per day (range, 6 to 35), including 15.3 (range, 6 to 35) during waking hours and 4.2 (range, 0 to 9) during sleep. The mean sensitivity (ie, subjective detection of objectively measured hot flashes) was 60%. Regression analyses revealed that total number of objective hot flashes, sleep duration, and verbal knowledge were significant predictors of delayed verbal memory. Verbal fluency correlated positively with objective daytime hot flashes. Hot flashes did not predict performance on any of the other secondary cognitive measures (ie, attention, working memory, visual memory), although poor sleep predicted worse performance on several outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Highly symptomatic women underreport the number of objective hot flashes that they experience by 43%. Verbal memory performance relates significantly to the objective number of hot flashes women experience but not to the number of hot flashes that they report. These findings suggest that physiological factors related to hot flashes, rather than psychological factors, predict poorer verbal memory function.
OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that hot flashes specifically relate to verbal memory performance by examining the relationship between objective hot flashes and cognitive test performance in women with moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms. DESIGN: In an observational study, 29 midlife women (mean age, 53 y) with moderate to severe hot flashes provided measures of objective hot flashes with an ambulatory hot flash monitor, subjective hot flashes with a diary and questionnaire, and objective measures of verbal memory and other cognitive functions with standardized neuropsychological tests. RESULTS: The mean number of objective hot flashes was 19.5 per day (range, 6 to 35), including 15.3 (range, 6 to 35) during waking hours and 4.2 (range, 0 to 9) during sleep. The mean sensitivity (ie, subjective detection of objectively measured hot flashes) was 60%. Regression analyses revealed that total number of objective hot flashes, sleep duration, and verbal knowledge were significant predictors of delayed verbal memory. Verbal fluency correlated positively with objective daytime hot flashes. Hot flashes did not predict performance on any of the other secondary cognitive measures (ie, attention, working memory, visual memory), although poor sleep predicted worse performance on several outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Highly symptomatic women underreport the number of objective hot flashes that they experience by 43%. Verbal memory performance relates significantly to the objective number of hot flashes women experience but not to the number of hot flashes that they report. These findings suggest that physiological factors related to hot flashes, rather than psychological factors, predict poorer verbal memory function.
Authors: E B Gold; B Sternfeld; J L Kelsey; C Brown; C Mouton; N Reame; L Salamone; R Stellato Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2000-09-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: D R Meldrum; J D Defazio; Y Erlik; J K Lu; A F Wolfsen; H E Carlson; J M Hershman; H L Judd Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 1984-12 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Lynnette Leidy Sievert; Robert R Freedman; Jesus Zarain Garcia; Jennifer W Foster; Ma del Carmen Romano Soriano; Christopher Longcope; Charlene Franz Journal: Menopause Date: 2002 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Pauline M Maki; Lorraine Dennerstein; Margaret Clark; Janet Guthrie; Pamela LaMontagne; Deanne Fornelli; Deborah Little; Victor W Henderson; Susan M Resnick Journal: Brain Res Date: 2010-11-13 Impact factor: 3.252
Authors: Gioia M Guerrieri; Paul G Wakim; P A Keenan; Linda A Schenkel; Kate Berlin; Carolyn J Gibson; David R Rubinow; Peter J Schmidt Journal: Neuropsychologia Date: 2015-12-21 Impact factor: 3.139
Authors: Rebecca C Thurston; Pauline M Maki; Carol A Derby; Ervin Sejdić; Howard J Aizenstein Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Rebecca A Nebel; Neelum T Aggarwal; Lisa L Barnes; Aimee Gallagher; Jill M Goldstein; Kejal Kantarci; Monica P Mallampalli; Elizabeth C Mormino; Laura Scott; Wai Haung Yu; Pauline M Maki; Michelle M Mielke Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2018-06-12 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Stacie E Geller; Lee P Shulman; Richard B van Breemen; Suzanne Banuvar; Ying Zhou; Geena Epstein; Samad Hedayat; Dejan Nikolic; Elizabeth C Krause; Colleen E Piersen; Judy L Bolton; Guido F Pauli; Norman R Farnsworth Journal: Menopause Date: 2009 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.953