Viviane Amaral Carvalho1,2, Paulo Caramelli1,2. 1. Post-graduate program in Neurology, University of Sao Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo (SP), Brazil. 2. Behavioral and Cognitive Neurology Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine of the Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte (MG), Brazil.
Abstract
The Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) is a highly sensitive and specific tool for the detection of mild dementia. It is particularly useful in differentiating Alzheimer's disease from frontotemporal dementia. While the first version of the test battery has been adapted in many countries, its revised version has not, probably because it was published very recently. OBJECTIVE: To translate and adapt the ACE-R for use in the Brazilian population. METHODS: Two independent translations were made from English into Portuguese, followed by two independent back-translations. Few adaptations in accordance to the Brazilian culture and language were made and a first version of the instrument produced. This former version of the ACE-R was administered to 21 cognitively healthy subjects aged 60 years or more, with different educational levels. RESULTS: The mean age of the studied sample of healthy elderly was 75.4 years (ranging from 60 to 89 years). Small additional modifications were necessary after the evaluation of the first ten subjects in order to improve comprehension of the test. The final Portuguese version of the ACE-R was produced and was found to be well understood by the remaining 11 subjects, taking an average of 15 minutes to be administered. CONCLUSIONS: The Brazilian version of the ACE-R proved to be a promising cognitive instrument for testing both in research and clinical settings. With this regard, additional studies are currently being carried out in our unit in order to investigate the diagnostic properties of the ACE-R in our milieu.
The Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) is a highly sensitive and specific tool for the detection of mild dementia. It is particularly useful in differentiating Alzheimer's disease from frontotemporal dementia. While the first version of the test battery has been adapted in many countries, its revised version has not, probably because it was published very recently. OBJECTIVE: To translate and adapt the ACE-R for use in the Brazilian population. METHODS: Two independent translations were made from English into Portuguese, followed by two independent back-translations. Few adaptations in accordance to the Brazilian culture and language were made and a first version of the instrument produced. This former version of the ACE-R was administered to 21 cognitively healthy subjects aged 60 years or more, with different educational levels. RESULTS: The mean age of the studied sample of healthy elderly was 75.4 years (ranging from 60 to 89 years). Small additional modifications were necessary after the evaluation of the first ten subjects in order to improve comprehension of the test. The final Portuguese version of the ACE-R was produced and was found to be well understood by the remaining 11 subjects, taking an average of 15 minutes to be administered. CONCLUSIONS: The Brazilian version of the ACE-R proved to be a promising cognitive instrument for testing both in research and clinical settings. With this regard, additional studies are currently being carried out in our unit in order to investigate the diagnostic properties of the ACE-R in our milieu.
Cognitive evaluation is a mandatory step for the diagnosis of dementia, warranting more
attention in Brazil. There are still only a limited number of instruments that present
specific norms for use in our population, especially regarding the variables age and
education. In Brazil, the available instruments for brief cognitive evaluation of
dementia, in particular for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) include:[1] the Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE),[2-6]
the Test of Information-Memory-Concentration (IMC) of Blessed,[7] the CASI-S (Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument -
Short Form),[8-10] the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease
(CERAD),[11,12] the Cambridge Examination for Mental Disorders of the
Elderly (CAMDEX),[13,14] the NEUROPSI[15,16] and the Alzheimer’s
Disease Assessment Scale Cognition Component (ADAS-cog).[17,18] Another tool
also used in our population is the Brief Cognitive Screening Battery (BCSB)[19-22] that consists of the presentation of a sheet of paper with 10
simple line drawings that evaluates naming, recall and recognition aspects of memory,
using a semantic verbal fluency test and the clock drawing test as interference
tasks.[23]The Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination (ACE) is an additional tool which has similar
characteristics, although has not been studied in our population to date. The ACE is a
brief and reliable test battery that provides detection of early stages of dementia and
is also efficient in differentiating its subtypes, such as AD, frontotemporal dementia
(FTD), progressive supranuclear palsy, and other forms of dementia associated with
parkinsonism.[24] The test can
be administered in 15 to 20 minutes and, together with the MMSE, provides a more
thorough evaluation of six cognitive domains (orientation, attention, memory, verbal
fluency, language and visuospatial ability). Each of these domains can be individually
evaluated. Moreover, Mathuranath et al.[24] developed a ratio (V+L) / (O+M), called the VLOM
ratio, after observing that AD patients presented better performance in
domains such as verbal fluency (V) and language (L) when compared to FTD patients. These
findings are similar to the neuropsychological profiles of both diseases observed in
other studies.[25-28] However, patients with FTD presented better
performance in orientation tasks (O) and episodic memory (M), compared to AD
patients.The Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination was subsequently revised and data on this new
version has recently been published by Mioshi et al.[25] In this new version, called ACE-R, the structure and the
sequence of the tasks were completely reworked in order to facilitate its use. The
content was also modified to facilitate future translations, allowing adaptations and
use in other cultures, besides slightly increasing the instrument’s sensitivity level.
Furthermore, the ACE-R now has three versions (A, B and C). These versions differ
between each other with regard to the anterograde memory task, in which three different
stimuli are offered for the item “name and address”, in order to prevent recalling
information from previous assessments. Another difference from the original version was
that instead of six, the ACE-R assesses only five domains, namely: orientation and
attention (18 points), memory (26 points), verbal fluency (14 points), language (26
points) and visuospatial ability (16 points). The individual’s total score is still
obtained by the addition of all subtests’ scores, ranging from 0 to 100.The authors also developed a guide of instructions to offer further information on how
the scores should be noted. This guide also presents examples of acceptable answers,
models of drawings, and explanations of how to apply and correct the test. The idea is
to create a pattern when organizing all the answers in order to improve the overall
reliability of the test among examiners.While the original version has previously been studied in several countries, such as
Germany,[29]
Argentina,[30]
Belgium,[31,32] Spain,[33] India[34] and
Israel,[35] the ACE-R has not
yet been studied outside the UK. The present article has the objective of presenting the
adapted version of the ACE-R for use in Brazil.
Methods
Methodology of adaptation / Portuguese version of ACE-R
The process of ACE-R adaptation was initiated by two independent translations
from English to Portuguese, followed by two back-translations of these
Portuguese versions into English. The aim of this work was to reveal the
possible misunderstandings and ambiguities that the first translated version
could have contained. Subsequently, we carried out cross-cultural adaptation.
The same method was used for the Portuguese version of the Instructions
guide.In this adaptation of the battery we used the Brazilian version of the MMSE
proposed by Brucki et al.,[14]
as recommended by the Department of Cognitive Neurology and Aging of the
Brazilian Academy of Neurology.[1] The name and address pertaining to the memory item were
modified, as well as the questions of the retrograde memory item (the current
president’s name and the name of the president who proposed and built the
federal capital Brasília, in the early 50s). In the Language-naming item,
the illustration of a pencil was substituted by a pen, in order to maintain the
same command as the MMSE version mentioned earlier. In the
Language-comprehension item, one of the four commands was also substituted and
the illustration of an alligator inserted, so that the individual could “point
to the figure found at the Pantanal”, a swamp area and a well known Brazilian
ecosystem. In the Language-reading, irregular words were chosen to have similar
levels of difficulty in Portuguese and in English, such as “táxi, testa,
saxofone, fixar and ballet” (cab, forehead, saxophone, to fix and ballet).The ACE-R Brazilian version instrument took its final form after a pilot study
test. In this study, 21 healthy individuals were tested, aged 60 years or more,
with different educational levels, but no illiterate subjects were included. All
participants had no history of neurologic or psychiatric disease, as well as no
history of cognitive decline. They were all fully independent and performed
above specific education-adjusted cut-off scores in the MMSE as suggested by
Brucki et al.,[6] namely:
≥22 for subjects with 1-4 years, ≥25 for 5-8 years and ≥26
for those with 9 or more years of schooling. Initially, ten subjects were
submitted to the Portuguese first version and this experience highlighted some
additional modifications which were necessary. Following this, the final
Portuguese version of the ACE-R was produced and then administered to the
remaining 11 participants.The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Hospital das
Clínicas of the University of São Paulo School of Medicine and by
the Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Minas Gerais. All participants
signed the written informed consent.
Results
The 21 elderly subjects presented a mean age of 75.4± 7.1 years, ranging from
60 to 89 years. Seventeen (80.9%) of the participants were female and four (19.1%),
male. The mean number of years of formal education was 8.5±4.3(ranging from 3
to 22 years).The lowest total score observed in the ACE-R was 73, while the highest was 98. The
mean total score in the battery was of 83.3±10.0points. Minimum and maximum
total scores observed, as well as means and standard deviations for the subtests of
the battery, are shown in Table 1. The
instrument took 15 minutes on average to be administered. Overall, the comprehension
of the different items of the test was found to be good.
Table 1
Main demographic data of the sample and ACE-R scores
N=21
Minimum
Maximum
Mean (SD)
Maximum score
Age
60
89
75.4 (7.1)
-
Schooling (in years)
3
22
8.5 (4.3)
-
MMSE
22
29
26.9 (2.2)
30
ACE-R scores
Attention and
orientation
13
18
16.5 (1.5)
18
Memory
14
25
20.0 (4.0)
26
Fluency
4
13
10.1 (2.2)
14
Language
14
26
22.9 (3.4)
26
Visuospatial
9
16
14.2 (1.8)
16
Total score
73
98
83.3 (10.0)
100
Main demographic data of the sample and ACE-R scores
Discussion
In this study we have translated and adapted the revised version of the ACE (ACE-R)
to be used in Brazil. After its application on half of the sample, some additional
modifications were made to make it easier to understand by the low education level
subjects. Obviously, these modifications did not interfere with the original aims of
the battery authors. The final instrument proved to be easy to administer and was
well understood by a group of healthy elderly people with heterogeneous educational
background.Cognitive evaluation constitutes an important tool for the assessment of cerebral
functioning, being mandatory for the differential diagnosis between normal aging,
mild cognitive impairment, dementia and its subtypes. Sensitivity and specificity
are essential aspects of a cognitive investigative instrument, but these also depend
on knowledge of the imperative diversities and influences between cultures, gender,
age and educational level.As outlined previously, brief cognitive evaluation instruments validated in Brazil
remain scarce. Moreover, the differential diagnosis between AD and FTD represents a
challenge, especially in the early stages, and even fewer tools are available in our
milieu with this regard. Recently, a Brazilian version of the Frontal Assessment
Battery (FAB) was published by Beato et al.[36] This study represents an important contribution for
clinicians since it describes the performance of a group of healthy elderly people
in an executive function brief evaluation tool. Previous studies have shown good
sensitivity of the FAB in detecting frontal lobe dysfunction[37] and also in differentiating AD
from FTD patients.[38-40]However, the FAB assesses only some aspects of executive functions, while the ACE-R
includes the assessment of different cognitive domains, such as orientation and
attention, memory, verbal fluency, language and visuospatial ability. The more
comprehensive evaluation together with the VLOM ratio analysis provided by the ACE
and also by the ACE-R offer more information on the patients’ neuropsychological
profiles, which can be helpful to identify specific dementia subtypes. In the
original version (ACE), patients with AD performed better on tests of verbal fluency
and language (VL), whereas patients with FTD presented relatively better results on
orientation and episodic memory tasks (OM).[24,30,33] Similar findings were reported using the revised
version of ACE.[25] Therefore, the
Brazilian version of the ACE-R seems to be a promising tool for clinical use and
therefore warrants validation in our population. The Brazilian version of the ACE-R
is available through contact with the authors.These are the preliminary results of a study that intends to investigate the
applicability of ACE-R as an instrument of brief cognitive evaluation for healthy
Brazilian subjects and patients with suspected dementia, to determine the
sensitivity and specificity of this tool in mild-AD patients and to later assess its
capacity to differentiate between AD and FTD patients.
Authors: Jerson Laks; Elienai Maria Rubim Batista; Elza Rocha Lima Guilherme; Ana L cia Barros Contino; Maria Eliete Vieira Faria; Ivan Figueira; Eliasz Engelhardt Journal: Arq Neuropsiquiatr Date: 2003-10-28 Impact factor: 1.420
Authors: Sonia M D Brucki; Ricardo Nitrini; Paulo Caramelli; Paulo H F Bertolucci; Ivan H Okamoto Journal: Arq Neuropsiquiatr Date: 2003-10-28 Impact factor: 1.420
Authors: P H Bertolucci; I H Okamoto; S M Brucki; M O Siviero; J Toniolo Neto; L R Ramos Journal: Arq Neuropsiquiatr Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 1.420
Authors: J C Bier; M Ventura; V Donckels; E Van Eyll; T Claes; H Slama; P Fery; M Vokaer; M Pandolfo Journal: J Neurol Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Andrea Slachevsky; Juan Manuel Villalpando; Marie Sarazin; Valerie Hahn-Barma; Bernard Pillon; Bruno Dubois Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2004-07
Authors: Silsam Napolitano Alberto; Juliana Hotta Ansai; Ana Luísa Janducci; João Vitor Businaro Florido; Areta Dames Cachapuz Novaes; Maria Joana Duarte Caetano; Paulo Giusti Rossi; Larissa Riani Costa Tavares; Stephen Ronald Lord; Karina Gramani-Say Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2022-06-13
Authors: Helen Capeleto Francisco; Allan Gustavo Brigola; Ana Carolina Ottaviani; Ariene Angelini Dos Santos-Orlandi; Fabiana de Souza Orlandi; Francisco José Fraga; Letícia Pimenta Costa Guarisco; Marisa Silvana Zazzetta; Renata Valle Pedroso; Sofia Cristina Iost Pavarini Journal: Dement Neuropsychol Date: 2019 Jul-Sep
Authors: Élen Dos Santos Alves; Sofia Cristina Iost Pavarini; Bruna Moretti Luchesi; Ana Carolina Ottaviani; Juliana de Fátima Zacarin Cardoso; Keika Inouye Journal: Rev Lat Am Enfermagem Date: 2021-06-28
Authors: Maria Alice de Mattos Pimenta Parente; Roberta Roque Baradel; Rochele Paz Fonseca; Natalie Pereira; Maria Teresa Carthery-Goulart Journal: Dement Neuropsychol Date: 2014 Jul-Sep
Authors: Márcia L F Chaves; Claudia C Godinho; Claudia S Porto; Leticia Mansur; Maria Teresa Carthery-Goulart; Mônica S Yassuda; Rogério Beato Journal: Dement Neuropsychol Date: 2011 Jul-Sep
Authors: Karolina G César; Leonel T Takada; Sonia M D Brucki; Ricardo Nitrini; Luiz Fernando C Nascimento; Maira O Oliveira; Camila M S Gomes; Milena C S Almeida; Fábio H Porto; Mirna L H Senaha; Valéria S Bahia; Mônica S Yassuda; Thaís B L Silva; Jéssica N Ianof; Lívia Spíndola; Magali T Schmidt; Mário S Jorge; Patrícia H F Vale; Mário A Cecchini; Luciana Cassimiro; Roger T Soares; Márcia Rúbia Gonçalves; Ana Caroline S Martins; Elisângela Rocha; Patrícia Daré Journal: Dement Neuropsychol Date: 2013 Jul-Sep