Efficient Screening of Cognitive Dysfunction in Stroke Patients: Comparison Between the CAMCOG and the R-CAMCOG, Mini Mental State Examination and Functional Independence Measure-Cognition ScoreBy Te Winkel-Witlox, A.C.M; Post, M.W.M.; Visser-Meily, J.M.A.; Lindeman, E.; Disability and Rehabilitation, Vol. 30, No. 8, pp. 1386-1391
Publication Date: 2008
Study undertaken to determine the most useful brief screening instrument for cognitive dysfunction after stroke that can be used in lieu of the lengthy cognitive part of the Cambridge Examination for Mental Disorders (CAMCOG). The CAMCOG, which consists of 67 items and takes 25 to 45 minutes to administer, is considered too time-consuming to be used in acute or post-acute care settings. An abbreviated 10-minute version of the instrument, the Rotterdam CAMCOG (R-CAMCOG), consisting of 25 items measuring the domains of orientation, memory, abstraction, and perception, were compared with the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) cognition score. The 10-item MMSE measures the domains of orientation, attention, memory, calculation, language, and construction. The 5-item FIM measures communication, memory, social interaction, and problem solving. The three instruments were compared using the CAMCOG as criterion standard. A total of 169 stroke patients completed all four instruments after admission to clinical rehabilitation and one year after stroke. The correlations between all tests were then examined using Spearman coefficients. Results showed Spearman correlations with the CAMCOG to be very strong for the R-CAMCOG, strong for the MMSE, and moderate to weak for the FIM. Stepwise linear regression analyses showed that, at admission, the R-CAMCOG explained 83 percent of the variance in the CAMCOG, and the MMSE and R-CAMCOG together explained 87 percent. Results were similar one year after stroke. The study concludes that the R-CAMCOG appears to be an efficient alternative to the CAMCOG as a screening tool for cognitive dysfunction of stroke patients.
Assistive Products Discussed: FIM SYSTEM
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Limited (Website:http://taylorandfrancis.org)
International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (Web Site: http://www.isprm.org )
This publication is included in the library of the National Rehabilitation Information Center (NARIC), accession number J55507