Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Screening for mild cognitive impairment in elderly ambulatory patients with cognitive complaints

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background and aims: Identification of patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) is strongly recommended because of their increased risk of dementia. Two brief global cognitive instruments, the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Clock Drawing Test (CDT), were examined as useful screening methods for MCI. Methods: The sensitivity and specificity of MMSE and CDT, scored using the Sunderland and Wolf-Klein methods, were evaluated in 113 elderly individuals with three different MCI subtypes: amnestic, multiple domain impairments, and single non-memory domain. Diagnoses were made on the basis of extensive clinical and neuropsychometric assessment. Results: Used alone, MMSE and CDT at standard cut-offs were highly specific (about 0.80) but rather insensitive (less than 0.50) to all MCI subtypes. By contrast, when used in combination, an abnormal result on either MMSE or CDT scored by the Sunderland method had a specificity of 0.69 [0.57–0.81] and a sensitivity of 0.75 [0.64–0.87] for multiple domain impairments MCI. Results were similar for MMSE in combination with CDT scored by the Wolf-Klein method (specificity 0.71 [0.59–0.83]; sensitivity 0.68 [0.56–0.80]). Conclusions: MMSE and CDT alone are not valid screening methods for MCI detection. In combination, they reach fair sensitivity and specificity for the multiple domain impairment MCI subtype. However, some theoretical concerns relating to this subtype, together with the uncertainty that still lingers about its prognostic value, caution against routine use of MMSE and CDT as MCI screening instruments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Petersen RC. Mild cognitive impairment as a diagnostic entity. J Intern Med 2004; 256: 183–94.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Honig LS, Mayeux R. Natural history of Alzheimer’s disease. Aging Clin Exp Res 2001; 13: 171–82.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Palmer K, Fratiglioni L, Winblad B. What is mild cognitive impairment? Variations in definitions and evolution of nondemented persons with cognitive impairment. Acta Neurol Scand Suppl 2003; 179: 14–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Petersen RC, Stevens JC, Ganguli M, et al. Practice parameter: early detection of dementia: mild cognitive impairment (an evidence-based review). Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology 2001; 56: 1133–42.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, et al. Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol 1999; 56: 303–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Knopman DS, DeKosky ST, Cummings JL, et al. Practice parameter: diagnosis of dementia (an evidence-based review). Report of the Quality Standards Subcomittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology 2001; 56: 1143–53.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Galluzzi S, Cimaschi L, Ferrucci L, Frisoni GB. Mild cognitive impairment: clinical features and review of screening instruments. Aging Clin Exp Res 2001; 13: 183–202.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Shulman KI. Clock-drawing: is it the ideal cognitive screening test? Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2000; 15: 548–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Katz S, Downs TD, Cash HR, Grotz RC. Progress in development of the index of ADL. Gerontologist 1970; 10: 20–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist 1969; 9: 179–85.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Yesavage JA, Brink TL, Rose TL, et al. Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. J Psychiatr Res 1982; 17: 37–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Morris JC. The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology 1993; 43: 2412–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Carlesimo GA, Caltagirone C, Gainotti G. The Mental Deterioration Battery: normative data, diagnostic reliability and qualitative analyses of cognitive impairment. Eur J Neurol 1996; 36: 378–84.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. The Italian Group on the Neuropsychological Study of Ageing: Italian standardization and classification of neuropsychological tests. Ital J Neurol Sci 1987; (Suppl 8): 1–120.

  15. Valente C, Maione P, Lippi A, et al. Validation of the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) as a screening instrument for dementia in an Italian population. Giorn Geront 1992; 40: 161–5.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Magni E, Binetti G, Bianchetti A, et al. Mini-Mental State Examination: a normative study in an Italian elderly population. Eur J Neurol 1996; 3: 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sunderland T, Hill JL, Mellow AM, et al. Clock drawing in Alzheimer’s disease: a novel measure of dementia severity. J Am Geriatr Soc 1989; 37: 725–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wolf-Klein GP, Silverstone FA, Levy AP, Brod MS. Screening for Alzheimer disease by clock drawing. J Am Geriatr Soc 1989; 37: 730–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed. Washington, D.C: American Psychiatric Association, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  20. McKhann G, Drachman D, Folstein M, et al. Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease: report of NINCDS-ADRDA Work group, under the auspices of Department of Health and Human Services Task Force on Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology 1984; 34: 939–44.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Tang-Wai DF, Knopman DS, Geda YW, et al. Comparison of the Short Test of Mental Status and the Mini-Mental State Examination in mild cognitive impairment. Arch Neurol 2003; 60: 177–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Tombaugh TN, McIntyre NJ. The Mini-Mental State Examination: a comprehensive review. J Am Geriatr Soc 1992; 40: 922–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Grigoletto F, Zappala G, Anderson DW, Lebowitz BD. Norms for the Mini-Mental State Examination in a healthy population. Neurology 1999; 53: 315–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Yamamoto S, Mogi N, Umegaki H, et al. The clock drawing test as a valid screening method for mild cognitive impairment. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2004; 18: 172–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Powlishta KK, Von Dras DD, Stanford A, et al. The clock drawing test is a poor screen for very mild dementia. Neurology 2002; 59: 898–903.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Richardson HE, Glass JN. A comparison of scoring protocols on the clock drawing test in relation to ease of use, diagnostic group, and correlations with Mini Mental State Examination. J Am Geriatr Soc 2002; 50: 169–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ravaglia G, Forti P, Maioli F, et al. Education, occupation, and prevalence of dementia: findings from the Conselice study. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2002; 14: 90–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ganguli M, Dodge HH, Changyu S, DeKosky ST. Mild cognitive impairment, amnestic type. An epidemiologic study. Neuroloy 2004; 63: 115–21.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Luis CA, Loewenstein DA, Acevedo A, et al. Mild cognitive impairment: directions for future research. Neurology 2003; 61: 438–44.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Neri M, Roth M, Rubichi S, et al. The validity of informant report for grading the severity of Alzheimer’s Dementia. Aging Clin Exp Res 2001; 13: 22–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Internal Medicine, Cardioangiology and Hepatology, University Hospital S. Orsola-Malpighi, Via Massarenti 9, 40138, Bologna, Italy

    Giovanni Ravaglia MD, Paola Forti, Fabiola Maioli, Lucia Servadei, Mabel Martelli, Nicoletta Brunetti & Luciana Bastagli

  2. Laboratory of Immunology and Genetics, Codivilla Putti Research Institute, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Bologna, Italy

    Erminia Mariani

Authors
  1. Giovanni Ravaglia MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paola Forti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fabiola Maioli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lucia Servadei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mabel Martelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nicoletta Brunetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Luciana Bastagli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Erminia Mariani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giovanni Ravaglia MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ravaglia, G., Forti, P., Maioli, F. et al. Screening for mild cognitive impairment in elderly ambulatory patients with cognitive complaints. Aging Clin Exp Res 17, 374–379 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03324625

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03324625

Keywords

Search

Navigation