Background: Neuropsychological performance has a strong impact on real-life functioning and clinical outcomes in psychosis. However, conducting lengthy cognitive assessments may not be feasible in routine clinical practice. Brief, reliable and cost-effective tools are highly needed, but few studies are available to guide clinician choice. Methods: The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of two widely used, short instruments: the Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry (SCIP) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). These instruments were validated in a sample of patients with psychotic disorders and healthy controls, using the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) and other instruments to assess executive functions, as comparators. Results: Patients fared worse than controls across almost all cognitive domains, with effect sizes ranging from 0 (MoCA naming) to 2.08 (SCIP total). Receiver Operator Curve analysis of patient and control performance suggested a better convergent validity for the SCIP (total score AUC: 0.85; 95%CI: 0.79–0.90; Se: 76%, Sp: 83%, PPV: 85%, NPV: 73%) than the MoCA (AUC: 0.78; 95%CI: 0.72–0.85; Se: 69%, Sp: 76%, PPV: 78.7%, NPV 66%). Conclusions: The Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry seems to be a more sensitive and specific screening tool than the MoCA to identify cognitive impairment among patients with psychotic disorders.
Screening for cognitive impairment in non-affective psychoses: A comparison between the SCIP and the MoCA
Belvederi Murri M.Co-primo
;Folesani F.Co-primo
;Costa S.;Biancosino B.;Colla C.;Zerbinati L.;Caruso R.;Nanni M. G.;Grassi L.Ultimo
2020
Abstract
Background: Neuropsychological performance has a strong impact on real-life functioning and clinical outcomes in psychosis. However, conducting lengthy cognitive assessments may not be feasible in routine clinical practice. Brief, reliable and cost-effective tools are highly needed, but few studies are available to guide clinician choice. Methods: The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of two widely used, short instruments: the Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry (SCIP) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). These instruments were validated in a sample of patients with psychotic disorders and healthy controls, using the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) and other instruments to assess executive functions, as comparators. Results: Patients fared worse than controls across almost all cognitive domains, with effect sizes ranging from 0 (MoCA naming) to 2.08 (SCIP total). Receiver Operator Curve analysis of patient and control performance suggested a better convergent validity for the SCIP (total score AUC: 0.85; 95%CI: 0.79–0.90; Se: 76%, Sp: 83%, PPV: 85%, NPV: 73%) than the MoCA (AUC: 0.78; 95%CI: 0.72–0.85; Se: 69%, Sp: 76%, PPV: 78.7%, NPV 66%). Conclusions: The Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry seems to be a more sensitive and specific screening tool than the MoCA to identify cognitive impairment among patients with psychotic disorders.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
1-s2.0-S0920996420300220-main.pdf
solo gestori archivio
Descrizione: versione editoriale
Tipologia:
Full text (versione editoriale)
Licenza:
NON PUBBLICO - Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione
340.87 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
340.87 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.