S Krupp1, A Seebens2,3,4, J Kasper2, M Willkomm2, F Balck2,3. 1. Forschungsgruppe Geriatrie Lübeck, Krankenhaus Rotes Kreuz Lübeck - Geriatriezentrum, Marlistr. 10, 23566, Lübeck, Deutschland. krupp@geriatrie-luebeck.de. 2. Forschungsgruppe Geriatrie Lübeck, Krankenhaus Rotes Kreuz Lübeck - Geriatriezentrum, Marlistr. 10, 23566, Lübeck, Deutschland. 3. Psychosoziale Medizin und Entwicklungsneurowissenschaften, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Deutschland. 4. Universität zu Lübeck, Lübeck, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Especially during admission the detection of cognitive deficits relevant to everyday life should burden patient and examiner as little as possible. The 6‑item screener (SIS) takes approximately 1 min, is easy to learn, does not require any material and is independent of the patient's visual and fine motor skills. The test was first published in 2002 by Callahan who approved the present German translation. OBJECTIVE: We checked the convergent and discriminant validity, reliability and sensitivity to change of the German translation among geriatric patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 165 patients in an acute geriatric department performed the SIS (4 times), the mini mental state examination (MMSE, 2 times), clock-drawing test according to Shulman (2 times), the Regensburg verbal fluency test (2 times) and the Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale within a period of 16 days. The overall judgment of a physician blinded to the test results served as the reference standard. RESULTS: The SIS closely correlated with the medical judgment (-0.729). The retest reliability was 0.705 and the internal consistency 0.821 (Cronbach's alpha). The sensitivity to detect cognitive deficits relevant to activities of daily living was 100% if a threshold of 5 points was chosen. The achievement of maximum points largely rules out even mild cognitive impairment. CONCLUSION: The SIS is a valid, reliable short cognitive test. Using a threshold of 5 points the SIS detects cognitive deficits relevant to daily living with a higher sensitivity than the MMSE with a threshold of 25. When the maximum score is achieved there are no medical indications for further cognitive assessment of clinically unremarkable geriatric patients. The brevity and simple application of the SIS also enable its application outside geriatric wards.
BACKGROUND: Especially during admission the detection of cognitive deficits relevant to everyday life should burden patient and examiner as little as possible. The 6‑item screener (SIS) takes approximately 1 min, is easy to learn, does not require any material and is independent of the patient's visual and fine motor skills. The test was first published in 2002 by Callahan who approved the present German translation. OBJECTIVE: We checked the convergent and discriminant validity, reliability and sensitivity to change of the German translation among geriatric patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 165 patients in an acute geriatric department performed the SIS (4 times), the mini mental state examination (MMSE, 2 times), clock-drawing test according to Shulman (2 times), the Regensburg verbal fluency test (2 times) and the Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale within a period of 16 days. The overall judgment of a physician blinded to the test results served as the reference standard. RESULTS: The SIS closely correlated with the medical judgment (-0.729). The retest reliability was 0.705 and the internal consistency 0.821 (Cronbach's alpha). The sensitivity to detect cognitive deficits relevant to activities of daily living was 100% if a threshold of 5 points was chosen. The achievement of maximum points largely rules out even mild cognitive impairment. CONCLUSION: The SIS is a valid, reliable short cognitive test. Using a threshold of 5 points the SIS detects cognitive deficits relevant to daily living with a higher sensitivity than the MMSE with a threshold of 25. When the maximum score is achieved there are no medical indications for further cognitive assessment of clinically unremarkable geriatric patients. The brevity and simple application of the SIS also enable its application outside geriatric wards.
Authors: T Frühwald; M Weissenberger-Leduc; C Jagsch; K Singler; S Gurlit; W Hofmann; B Böhmdorfer; B Iglseder Journal: Z Gerontol Geriatr Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 1.281
Authors: Christopher R Carpenter; Bobby DesPain; Travis N Keeling; Mansi Shah; Morgan Rothenberger Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2010-09-19 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Christopher M Callahan; Frederick W Unverzagt; Siu L Hui; Anthony J Perkins; Hugh C Hendrie Journal: Med Care Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Stefan Grund; Michael Kilb; Eva Breitinger; Wilfried Hundsdörfer; Hans G Schäfer; Jos M G A Schols; Adam L Gordon; Jürgen M Bauer; Georg W Alpers Journal: Eur Geriatr Med Date: 2021-09-12 Impact factor: 1.710
Authors: Jochen Gensichen; Susanne Schultz; Christine Adrion; Konrad Schmidt; Maggie Schauer; Daniela Lindemann; Natalia Unruh; Robert P Kosilek; Antonius Schneider; Martin Scherer; Antje Bergmann; Christoph Heintze; Stefanie Joos; Josef Briegel; Andre Scherag; Hans-Helmut König; Christian Brettschneider; Thomas G Schulze; Ulrich Mansmann; Klaus Linde; Dagmar Lühmann; Karen Voigt; Sabine Gehrke-Beck; Roland Koch; Bernhard Zwissler; Gerhard Schneider; Herwig Gerlach; Stefan Kluge; Thea Koch; Andreas Walther; Oxana Atmann; Jan Oltrogge; Maik Sauer; Julia Schnurr; Thomas Elbert Journal: Trials Date: 2018-09-10 Impact factor: 2.279