D'Or Institute for Research and Education (IDOR),Rio de Janeiro,Brazil.
Int Psychogeriatr. 2015 Oct;27(10):1679-86. doi: 10.1017/S1041610215000307. Epub 2015 Mar 13.
Prose memory tests exhibit ecological validity, but the influence of non-memory functions on immediate recall in elderly subjects with memory complaints has not been fully investigated. This study examined (1) whether the ability to immediately recall a story can distinguish among clinical controls, amnesic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) and (2) which cognitive functions contribute to immediate recall performance.
A total of 73 consecutive volunteers (50 women and 23 men) aged 47-88 (mean age = 71.85 ± 9.41) and with a mean schooling level of 12.51 (SD = 4.09) participated in the experiment. All individuals were seeking specialized evaluation because of memory complaints. Diagnoses were made by considering clinical, neuropsychological, and MRI assessments collected by a multidisciplinary team of neurologists, neuropsychologists, and speech-language therapists. A total of 26 individuals were classified as clinical controls; 27 as MCI patients; and 20 as having AD dementia. All individuals in the AD group had a Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) ≤ 1.
Immediate recall was only able to distinguish AD subjects from MCI patients and clinical controls (p > 0.05). Stepwise multiple linear regression analysis revealed that mental status (MMSE), semantic memory (WAIS-III vocabulary) and episodic memory (RAVLT primacy) explained approximately 62% of the variance in immediate recall.
Understanding the value and limitations of immediate story recall in distinguishing between MCI and AD may help clinicians in better choosing cognitive tests to diagnose MCI.
散文记忆测试具有生态效度,但对于有记忆主诉的老年受试者,非记忆功能对即时回忆的影响尚未得到充分研究。本研究考察了(1)能否立即回忆一个故事,可以区分临床对照组、遗忘型轻度认知障碍(MCI)和阿尔茨海默病(AD)所致痴呆;以及(2)哪些认知功能有助于即时回忆表现。
共有 73 名连续志愿者(50 名女性和 23 名男性)参加了实验,年龄 47-88 岁(平均年龄=71.85±9.41),平均受教育年限为 12.51 岁(SD=4.09)。所有个体因记忆主诉而寻求专门评估。通过考虑临床、神经心理学和 MRI 评估,由神经病学家、神经心理学家和言语治疗师组成的多学科团队进行诊断。共有 26 名个体被归类为临床对照组;27 名作为 MCI 患者;20 名为 AD 痴呆患者。AD 组的所有个体均有临床痴呆评定量表(CDR)≤1。
即时回忆只能区分 AD 患者与 MCI 患者和临床对照组(p>0.05)。逐步多元线性回归分析显示,心理状态(MMSE)、语义记忆(WAIS-III 词汇)和情景记忆(RAVLT 首因)解释了即时回忆中约 62%的差异。
了解即时故事回忆在区分 MCI 和 AD 方面的价值和局限性,可能有助于临床医生更好地选择认知测试来诊断 MCI。