Cross-Validating the Executive Errors Scale of the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status.

The Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) was developed to briefly measure a broad range of cognitive abilities, but it initially lacked a scale to evaluate executive functioning. Robert Spencer and colleagues recently created an Executive Errors scale (RBANS-EE) that quantified executive functioning (EF) errors committed during four RBANS subtests: List Learning, Semantic Fluency, Coding, and List Recall. In the present paper we cross-validated the RBANS-EE with a sample of 234 U.S. military veterans (M AGE = 67.2, SD = 11.5 years; M EDUCATION = 13.3, SD = 2.4 years) who completed the RBANS and various EF criterion measures as part of neuropsychological assessments they underwent during their clinical care. We found the RBANS-EE to be significantly correlated with most of the criterion EF measures. The RBANS-EE scale demonstrated modest ability to classify EF impairment at mild and severe levels; and, similarly, the RBANS-EE was modestly capable of accurately classifying those veteran respondents who were determined to have or to not have a neurocognitive disorder. Overall, the RBANS-EE can be quickly calculated, adds no administration time to an RBANS assessment, and yields useful scores to screen for EF dysfunction without replacing standalone EF tests.

Using supplemental memory measures to refine interpretation of the repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status.

The Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) is frequently used as a cognitive screening measure or as part of a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Augmenting the current memory subtests of the RBANS to reflect clinically meaningful distinctions in memory performance may improve its clinical utility, allowing users to generate additional hypotheses and refine clinical interpretations. We pilot four supplementary memory measures to use with the RBANS, adapted from paradigms commonly used by other neuropsychological tests. We also provide several new theoretically derived memory indices to supplement the standard Delayed Memory Index. The new subtests correlated significantly with the standard memory measures, and the new indices demonstrated good reliability and diagnostic accuracy. This study provides preliminary support for supplementing the RBANS to allow for more nuanced interpretations of memory performance.

Developing learning slope scores for the repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status.

Initial learning and learning slope are often acknowledged as important qualitative aspects of learning, but the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) contains discrete indices for neither. The traditional method of calculating learning slope involves a difference score between the last trial and first trial, which is referred to as raw learning score (RLS). However, this method does not account for initial Trial One performance and produces a ceiling effect that penalizes efficient first learners. We propose an alternative method of calculating learning score that accounts for initial learning performance, called learning ratio (LR), and we compared the psychometric and predictive properties of these methods. Performances from the List Learning and Story Memory subtests were used to create the indices, and composite learning scores were calculated by combining List Learning and Story Memory. The sample included 289 military veterans (mean age = 65.9 [12.6], education = 13.3 [2.4]), most of whom were male, undergoing neuropsychological assessments that included the RBANS. Results indicated that LR demonstrated superior correlations with criterion measures of memory when compared with RLS, and the LR composite score better discriminated between those with and without a neurocognitive diagnosis, AUC = 0.81 (0.76-0.87), than the RLS composite, AUC = 0.70 (0.64-0.76). We concluded that scores from the RBANS can be computed for initial learning and learning slope and that the LR method of calculating learning is superior to RLS in this older veteran sample.

Minimal benefit to extending the stroop Interference Task among individuals undergoing outpatient assessment.

The third trial of Golden's Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT), which involves identifying the color of words printed in a color that contrasts with its spelling, is usually limited to 45 seconds. Some authors have opined on the benefits of extending this portion of the test beyond 45 seconds to increase sensitivity to cognitive deficits and preliminary data among healthy individuals support this notion. This project examined possible benefits of extending the test beyond the standard 45 second time limit. Fifty-four veteran patients completed the SCWT as part of outpatient neuropsychological assessment. Speed of completing items within 45 seconds was compared to the speed of completing items beyond the first 45 seconds. A composite measure made of neuropsychological tests requiring speed and complex attention served as the criterion measure. Results indicated that extending the interference trial of the SCWT did not improve prediction on criterion measures beyond the standard 45 second SCWT. In conclusion, among individuals undergoing clinical evaluations, extending the SCWT beyond 45 seconds is unlikely to yield sufficient meaningful clinical data to offset the additional administration time and potential frustration to examinees.

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment in Veteran Postacute Care: Implications of Cut Scores.

BACKGROUND: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is often used for cognitive screening across health care settings, especially in rehabilitation centers, where assessment and treatment of cognitive function is considered key for successful multidisciplinary treatment. Although the original MoCA validation study suggested a cut score of <26 to identify cognitive impairment, recent studies have suggested that lower cut scores should be applied. OBJECTIVES: To examine the percentage of positive screens for cognitive impairment using the MoCA in a veteran postacute care (PAC) rehabilitation setting and to identify the most accurate MoCA cut score based on criterion neuropsychological measures. METHODS: We obtained data from 81 veterans with diverse medical diagnoses who had completed the MoCA during their admission to a PAC unit. A convenience subsample of 50 veterans had also completed four criterion neuropsychological measures. RESULTS: Depending on the cut score used, the percentage of individuals classified as impaired based on MoCA performance varied widely, ranging from 6.2% to 92.6%. When predicting performance using a more comprehensive battery of criterion neuropsychological tests, we identified <22 as the most accurate MoCA cut score to identify a clinically relevant level of impairment and <24 to identify milder cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that a MoCA cut score of <26 carries a risk of misdiagnosis of cognitive impairment, and scores in the range of <22 to <24 are more reliable for identifying cognitive impairment.