Odelia Elkana1, Noy Tal1, Noga Oren2, Shani Soffer1, Elissa L Ash3,4. 1. Behavioral Sciences, Academic College of Tel Aviv-Yaffo, Tel Aviv-Yaffo, Israel. 2. The Functional MRI Center, Beilinson Hospital, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikva, Israel. 3. Department of Neurology, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel. 4. Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is widely used to evaluate cognitive decline in older individuals. Although, age and education-related norms have been published, the vast majority of diagnostic clinicians use the MoCA cutoff score to identify patients with cognitive impairment. AIM: To identify whether the MoCA cutoff is too stringent for cognitively normal older adults. METHODS: Twenty-seven participants aged 68 to 83 (mean = 75.07, standard deviation [SD] = 4.62), with high education level (mean = 17.14 years, SD = 3.21) underwent cognitive assessment once a year for 5 consecutive years. The cognitive assessment included MoCA; Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test; Rey Osterrieth Complex Figure test; Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Information and Digit Span Subtest; Trail Making Test; Verbal Fluency Test; and Beck Depression Inventory questionnaire. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze all standardized scores as well as MoCA standardized and raw scores across all years. RESULTS: Repeated-measures ANOVA for MoCA raw scores yielded significant decline across the years (P < .05). From the second year and forward, the average MoCA total score was below the cutoff of 26/30. However, in substantial contrast, all other neuropsychological scores and the MoCA standardized scores were within the normal range and even above in all years. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that the currently used MoCA cutoff is too high even for highly educated, cognitively normal older adults. Therefore, it is crucial to use the age- and education-related norms for the MoCA in order to avoid misdiagnosis of cognitive decline.
BACKGROUND: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is widely used to evaluate cognitive decline in older individuals. Although, age and education-related norms have been published, the vast majority of diagnostic clinicians use the MoCA cutoff score to identify patients with cognitive impairment. AIM: To identify whether the MoCA cutoff is too stringent for cognitively normal older adults. METHODS: Twenty-seven participants aged 68 to 83 (mean = 75.07, standard deviation [SD] = 4.62), with high education level (mean = 17.14 years, SD = 3.21) underwent cognitive assessment once a year for 5 consecutive years. The cognitive assessment included MoCA; Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test; Rey Osterrieth Complex Figure test; Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Information and Digit Span Subtest; Trail Making Test; Verbal Fluency Test; and Beck Depression Inventory questionnaire. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze all standardized scores as well as MoCA standardized and raw scores across all years. RESULTS: Repeated-measures ANOVA for MoCA raw scores yielded significant decline across the years (P < .05). From the second year and forward, the average MoCA total score was below the cutoff of 26/30. However, in substantial contrast, all other neuropsychological scores and the MoCA standardized scores were within the normal range and even above in all years. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that the currently used MoCA cutoff is too high even for highly educated, cognitively normal older adults. Therefore, it is crucial to use the age- and education-related norms for the MoCA in order to avoid misdiagnosis of cognitive decline.
Authors: Alexander Soutschek; Alexandra Bagaïni; Todd A Hare; Philippe N Tobler Journal: Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 3.436
Authors: Mirjam R Heldner; Caroline Chalfine; Marion Houot; Roza M Umarova; Jan Rosner; Julian Lippert; Laura Gallucci; Anne Leger; Flore Baronnet; Yves Samson; Charlotte Rosso Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-02-17 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Peter May; Céline De Looze; Joanne Feeney; Soraya Matthews; Rose Anne Kenny; Charles Normand Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2022-06-07 Impact factor: 3.850