Eva Pirogovsky1, Dawn M Schiehser1, Irene Litvan2, Kristalyn M Obtera3, Mathes M Burke3, Stephanie L Lessig4, David D Song4, Lin Liu5, J Vincent Filoteo6. 1. Veterans Affairs, San Diego Health Care System, San Diego, CA, USA; Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA. 2. Department of Neurosciences, Movement Disorder Center, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA. 3. Veterans Affairs, San Diego Health Care System, San Diego, CA, USA. 4. Veterans Affairs, San Diego Health Care System, San Diego, CA, USA; Department of Neurosciences, Movement Disorder Center, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA. 5. Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA. 6. Veterans Affairs, San Diego Health Care System, San Diego, CA, USA; Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA. Electronic address: vfiloteo@ucsd.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Movement Disorders Society (MDS) recently proposed guidelines for diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease (PD-MCI) that includes two assessment levels: abbreviated (Level I) and comprehensive (Level II). The aim of this study was to determine the utility of the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (MDRS), a recommended Level I test, for detecting Level II PD-MCI diagnosis. METHODS: The study sample included 30 patients diagnosed with PD-MCI based on Level II MDS criteria and 68 PD patients with normal cognition (PD-NC). Receiver operator curve (ROC) analyses were generated to measure the sensitivity and specificity of various MDRS cutoff scores. To examine the utility of the MDRS as a screening tool, the optimal cutoff point was defined as the lowest value providing ≥80% sensitivity. For use of the MDRS as a diagnostic tool, the optimal cutoff point was defined as the highest value providing ≥80% specificity. RESULTS: ROC analyses showed that the optimal MDRS cutoff score for screening purposes and diagnostic purposes were ≤140 and ≤137, respectively. However, an examination of sensitivity/specificity values for the screening cutoff scores suggested that a total score of ≤139 for screening purposes yielded a better balance between sensitivity (77%) and specificity (65%). CONCLUSIONS: In a clinical setting, in which detection of PD-MCI may be important, a total MDRS score of ≤139 can be used to detect PD-MCI. In research and other settings in which diagnostic certainty is more important, a score of ≤137 may be more useful. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
BACKGROUND: The Movement Disorders Society (MDS) recently proposed guidelines for diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease (PD-MCI) that includes two assessment levels: abbreviated (Level I) and comprehensive (Level II). The aim of this study was to determine the utility of the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (MDRS), a recommended Level I test, for detecting Level II PD-MCI diagnosis. METHODS: The study sample included 30 patients diagnosed with PD-MCI based on Level II MDS criteria and 68 PD patients with normal cognition (PD-NC). Receiver operator curve (ROC) analyses were generated to measure the sensitivity and specificity of various MDRS cutoff scores. To examine the utility of the MDRS as a screening tool, the optimal cutoff point was defined as the lowest value providing ≥80% sensitivity. For use of the MDRS as a diagnostic tool, the optimal cutoff point was defined as the highest value providing ≥80% specificity. RESULTS: ROC analyses showed that the optimal MDRS cutoff score for screening purposes and diagnostic purposes were ≤140 and ≤137, respectively. However, an examination of sensitivity/specificity values for the screening cutoff scores suggested that a total score of ≤139 for screening purposes yielded a better balance between sensitivity (77%) and specificity (65%). CONCLUSIONS: In a clinical setting, in which detection of PD-MCI may be important, a total MDRS score of ≤139 can be used to detect PD-MCI. In research and other settings in which diagnostic certainty is more important, a score of ≤137 may be more useful. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Authors: Francesca V Lopez; Lauren E Kenney; Adrianna Ratajska; Charles E Jacobson; Dawn Bowers Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 4.373
Authors: Eva M Müller-Oehring; Edith V Sullivan; Adolf Pfefferbaum; Neng C Huang; Kathleen L Poston; Helen M Bronte-Stewart; Tilman Schulte Journal: Brain Imaging Behav Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 3.978
Authors: Alberto Costa; Thomas Bak; Paolo Caffarra; Carlo Caltagirone; Mathieu Ceccaldi; Fabienne Collette; Sebastian Crutch; Sergio Della Sala; Jean François Démonet; Bruno Dubois; Emrah Duzel; Peter Nestor; Sokratis G Papageorgiou; Eric Salmon; Sietske Sikkes; Pietro Tiraboschi; Wiesje M van der Flier; Pieter Jelle Visser; Stefano F Cappa Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2017-04-17 Impact factor: 6.982
Authors: Hojoong M Kim; Carter Nazor; Cyrus P Zabetian; Joseph F Quinn; Kathryn A Chung; Amie L Hiller; Shu-Ching Hu; James B Leverenz; Thomas J Montine; Karen L Edwards; Brenna Cholerton Journal: Clin Park Relat Disord Date: 2019-10-20
Authors: Eileen Gülke; Mohammad Alsalem; Maja Kirsten; Eik Vettorazzi; Chi-Un Choe; Ute Hidding; Simone Zittel-Dirks; Carsten Buhmann; Miriam Schaper; Alessandro Gulberti; Christian K E Moll; Wolfgang Hamel; Johannes Koeppen; Christian Gerloff; Monika Pötter-Nerger Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-04-07 Impact factor: 3.240