Volume 3, Issue 4 p. 299-317
Review Article

Neuropsychological testing and assessment for dementia

Claudia Jacova

Claudia Jacova

Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
Andrew Kertesz

Andrew Kertesz

Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
Mervin Blair

Mervin Blair

Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
John D. Fisk

John D. Fisk

QE II Health Sciences Centre, Departments of Psychiatry, Medicine and Psychology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
Howard H. Feldman

Corresponding Author

Howard H. Feldman

Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Corresponding author. Tel.: (604) 822-7979; Fax: (604) 822-7703. E-mail address: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 01 October 2007
Citations: 88

Abstract

This evidence-based review examines the utility of brief cognitive tests and neuropsychological testing (NPT) in the detection and diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. All patients presenting with cognitive complaints are recommended to have a brief screening test administered to document the presence and severity of memory/cognitive deficits. There is fair evidence to support the use of a range of new screening tests that can detect MCI and mild dementia with higher sensitivity (≥80%) than the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE). NPT should be part of a clinically integrative approach to the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of dementia. It should be applied selectively to address specific clinical and diagnostic issues including: 1) The distinction between normal cognitive functioning in the aged, MCI and early dementia: there is fair evidence that NPT can document the presence of specific diagnostic criteria and provide additional useful information on the pattern of memory/cognitive impairment. 2) The evaluation of risk for Alzheimer disease (AD) or other types of dementia in persons with MCI: there is fair evidence that NPT measures or profiles can predict progression to dementia (predictive accuracy ranges from ∼80 to 100%, sensitivities from 53 to 80%, and specificities from 67 to 99%). 3) Differential diagnosis: There is fair evidence that NPT can complement clinical history and neuroimaging in determining the dementia etiology. Different dementia types have distinguishable NPT profiles though these may be stage-dependent, and increased sensitivity may be at the expense of specificity. 4) When NPT is part of a comprehensive assessment, which also entails clinical interviews and consideration of other clinical data, there is good evidence that it can contribute to management decisions in MCI and dementia, including the determination of retained and impaired cognitive abilities, their functional and vocational impact, and opportunities for cognitive rehabilitation.