For instance, the MMSE has a heavy language component, but that’s not an area that tends to be as much a deficit of conditions like Parkinson’s or other forms of dementia, so that’s where the MoCA comes in at being a little more sensitive.” It seems to be a little better at looking in depth at some of the deficits that the MMSE might not pick up. “The MoCA has since gone on to be used for other diseases as well. “The MoCA is newer to the scene and originally just looked at patients with milder forms of Alzheimer’s,” explains Stephanie Lessig, MD, an assistant clinical professor at UCSD Neurosciences and VA Medical Center, who was lead author on a comparative study examining the use of the MoCA vs. Assessing many of the same areas as the MMSE, the MoCA is a little more in depth and includes tasks such as a clock-drawing test and a trail test (connecting the dots).
Today, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a newer test created in 1996, is also available. Created by renowned psychiatrist Marshal Folstein, MD, and introduced in 1975, the MMSE tests cognitive function by examining orientation, word recall, language abilities, attention and calculation, and visuospatial ability. In the past, testing for Alzheimer’s disease and other cognitive issues often meant turning to the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE) before any further testing was undertaken. Nonetheless, this should not be taken to suggest the use of amplification during testing is unnecessary because it might be that other unmeasured factors, such as effort required to perform or fatigue, were decreased with the use of amplification.The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, used to evaluate cognitive abilities, can better discern some deficits than the Mini-Mental State Exam. It is concluded that the individuals with hearing loss here performed less well on the MoCA than individuals with NH and that the use of amplification did not compensate for this performance deficit.
Furthermore, there were strong correlations between MoCA score and the four frequency pure tone average, Maryland CNC score and QuickSIN, which remain moderate to strong when the analyses were adjusted for age. This is despite the finding that amplification significantly improved the performance of the hearing aid users on the measures of speech in quiet and speech in noise. The individuals with hearing impairment performed significantly less well on the MoCA than those without hearing impairment for unaided testing, and the use of amplification did not significantly change performance. Individuals with hearing impairment completed testing once unaided and once with amplification, whereas individuals with NH completed unaided testing twice.
The speech testing and MoCA were completed twice. Of the individuals with hearing impairment, 22 routinely used hearing aids 20 did not use hearing aids.įollowing a written informec consent process, all participants completed pure tone audiometry, speech testing in quiet (Maryland consonant-nucleus-consonant words) and in noise (Quick Speech in Noise test), and the MoCA. Participants were 42 individuals with hearing impairment and 19 individuals with NH. Secondarily, we investigated the effects of hearing ability on MoCA performance, by comparing the performance of individuals with and without hearing impairment. The primary purpose of this study was to examine whether use of amplification during cognitive screening with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) improves performance on the MoCA. However, it is not clear the extent to which this is testing artifact due to the individual with hearing loss being unable to accurately hear the test stimuli. There have been numerous recent reports on the association between hearing impairment and cognitive function, such that the cognition of adults with hearing loss is poorer relative to the cognition of adults with normal hearing (NH), even when amplification is used.
0 kommentar(er)
