Shawn M McClintock1,2, Lex Minto3, David A Denney4, K Chase Bailey4, C Munro Cullum4, Vonetta M Dotson5,6. 1. Division of Psychology, Department of Psychiatry, UT Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX, 75390-8898, USA. shawn.mcclintock@utsouthwestern.edu. 2. Division of Brain Stimulation and Neurophysiology, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA. shawn.mcclintock@utsouthwestern.edu. 3. Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA. 4. Division of Psychology, Department of Psychiatry, UT Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX, 75390-8898, USA. 5. Department of Psychology, Georgia State University, P.O. Box 5010, Atlanta, GA, 30302-5010, USA. 6. Gerontology Institute, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: Older adults with major depressive disorder are particularly vulnerable to MDD-associated adverse cognitive effects including slowed processing speed, decreased attention, and executive dysfunction. The purpose of this review is to describe the approach to a clinical neuropsychological evaluation in older adults with MDD. Specifically, this review compares and contrasts neurocognitive screening and clinical neuropsychological evaluation procedures and details the multiple components of the clinical neuropsychological evaluation. RECENT FINDINGS: Research has shown that neurocognitive screening serves a useful purpose to provide an acute and rapid assessment of global cognitive function; however, it has limited sensitivity and specificity. The clinical neuropsychological evaluation process is multifaceted and encompasses a review of available medical records, neurobehavioral status and diagnostic interview, comprehensive cognitive and clinical assessment, examination of inclusion and diversity factors as well as symptom and performance validity, and therapeutic feedback. As such, the evaluation provides invaluable information on multiple cognitive functions, establishes brain and behavior relationships, clarifies neuropsychiatric diagnoses, and can inform the etiology of cognitive impairment. Clinical neuropsychological evaluation plays a unique and critical role in integrated healthcare for older adults with MDD. Indeed, the evaluation can serve as a nexus to synthesize information across healthcare providers in order to maximize measurement-based care that can optimize personalized medicine and overall health outcomes.
PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: Older adults with major depressive disorder are particularly vulnerable to MDD-associated adverse cognitive effects including slowed processing speed, decreased attention, and executive dysfunction. The purpose of this review is to describe the approach to a clinical neuropsychological evaluation in older adults with MDD. Specifically, this review compares and contrasts neurocognitive screening and clinical neuropsychological evaluation procedures and details the multiple components of the clinical neuropsychological evaluation. RECENT FINDINGS: Research has shown that neurocognitive screening serves a useful purpose to provide an acute and rapid assessment of global cognitive function; however, it has limited sensitivity and specificity. The clinical neuropsychological evaluation process is multifaceted and encompasses a review of available medical records, neurobehavioral status and diagnostic interview, comprehensive cognitive and clinical assessment, examination of inclusion and diversity factors as well as symptom and performance validity, and therapeutic feedback. As such, the evaluation provides invaluable information on multiple cognitive functions, establishes brain and behavior relationships, clarifies neuropsychiatric diagnoses, and can inform the etiology of cognitive impairment. Clinical neuropsychological evaluation plays a unique and critical role in integrated healthcare for older adults with MDD. Indeed, the evaluation can serve as a nexus to synthesize information across healthcare providers in order to maximize measurement-based care that can optimize personalized medicine and overall health outcomes.
Authors: K Chase Bailey; Troy A Webber; Jacob I Phillips; Lindsay D R Kraemer; Janice C Marceaux; Jason R Soble Journal: Arch Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2021-04-21 Impact factor: 2.813
Authors: John G Keilp; Sean P Madden; Marianne Gorlyn; Ainsley K Burke; Maria A Oquendo; J John Mann Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2018-08-08 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Meryl A Butters; Ellen M Whyte; Robert D Nebes; Amy E Begley; Mary Amanda Dew; Benoit H Mulsant; Michelle D Zmuda; Rishi Bhalla; Carolyn Cidis Meltzer; Bruce G Pollock; Charles F Reynolds; James T Becker Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2004-06