Grace J, Nadler J D, White D A, Guilmette T J, Giuliano A J, Monsch A U, Snow M G
Brown University School of Medicine, Providence, RI, USA.
Arch Neurol. 1995 May;52(5):477-84. doi: 10.1001/archneur.1995.00540290067019.
Two studies were conducted with the Folstein Mini-Mental State Examination (MMS) and the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS) to examine whether the expanded version is a more useful screening tool in stroke populations.
Clinical utility of screening tests (MMS and 3MS) was evaluated in reference to neuropsychological performance and functional outcome in rehabilitation.
Medical rehabilitation unit of university-affiliated hospital.
Two groups (n = 77, and n = 70) of patients who were admitted consecutively.
Neuropsychological performance and functional outcome (functional independence measure).
The reliability, stability, and validity of the 3MS were established in the stroke population. Classification accuracy did not differ between the MMS and 3MS, although the 3MS had higher sensitivity. In detecting cognitive impairment when compared with the extended neuropsychological battery, both instruments were adequate in patients with left-sided cerebrovascular accidents and were ineffective in patients with right-sided cerebrovascular accidents. The 3MS correlated with some cognitive domains missed by the MMS, thus adding useful clinical information. Finally, the 3MS was a significantly better predictor of functional outcome than the MMS.
The 3MS was found to be a reliable, valid, and stable cognitive screening instrument in the stroke population. Classification accuracy indicates that both screening instruments are not strong in their ability to detect cognitive impairment in patients with stroke, especially in right-sided cerebrovascular accidents. The 3MS does have some advantages over the MMS; the expanded version of the screen not only provides additional cognitive information but also allows for better predicting of functional outcome.
开展了两项研究，使用福斯廷简易精神状态检查表（MMS）和改良简易精神状态检查表（3MS），以检验扩展版检查表在中风人群中是否为更有效的筛查工具。
参照康复中的神经心理学表现和功能转归，对筛查测试（MMS和3MS）的临床效用进行评估。
大学附属医院的医学康复科。
连续收治的两组患者（分别为77例和70例）。
神经心理学表现和功能转归（功能独立性测量）。
在中风人群中确立了3MS的信度、稳定性和效度。MMS和3MS的分类准确率无差异，尽管3MS的敏感性更高。与扩展神经心理成套测验相比，在检测认知障碍时，两种工具对左侧脑血管意外患者均适用，而对右侧脑血管意外患者均无效。3MS与MMS遗漏的一些认知领域相关，从而增加了有用的临床信息。最后，3MS在预测功能转归方面显著优于MMS。
在中风人群中，3MS是一种可靠、有效且稳定的认知筛查工具。分类准确率表明，两种筛查工具在检测中风患者认知障碍方面能力均不强，尤其是对右侧脑血管意外患者。3MS确实比MMS有一些优势；扩展版筛查不仅能提供额外的认知信息，还能更好地预测功能转归。
