Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mini-Cog versus Codex (cognitive disorders examination) Is there a difference? / Mini-Cog versus Codex (exame de distúrbios cognitivos): existe alguma diferença?
Larner, Andrew J.
  • Larner, Andrew J; Walton Centre for Neurology and Neurosurgery. Cognitive Function Clinic. Liverpool. GB
Dement. neuropsychol ; 14(2): 128-133, Apr.-June 2020. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1133626
ABSTRACT
Abstract. Mini-Cog and Codex (cognitive disorders examination) are brief cognitive screening tests incorporating word-recall and clock drawing tests.

Objective:

To assess and compare the screening accuracy of Mini-Cog and Codex for diagnosis of dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in patients attending a dedicated cognitive disorders clinic.

Methods:

Tests were administered to a consecutive cohort of 162 patients, whose reference standard diagnoses based on clinical diagnostic criteria were dementia (44), MCI (26), and subjective memory complaint (92).

Results:

Both Mini-Cog and Codex had high sensitivity (>0.8) for dementia diagnosis, but Codex was more specific. For diagnosis of MCI, Mini-Cog had better sensitivity than Codex. Weighted comparisons of Mini-Cog and Codex showed only marginal net benefit for Mini-Cog for dementia diagnosis but larger net benefit for MCI diagnosis.

Conclusion:

In this pragmatic study both Mini-Cog and Codex were accurate brief screening tests for dementia but Mini-Cog was better for identification of MCI.
RESUMO
Resumo. Mini-Cog e Codex são testes breves de triagem cognitiva incorporando testes de recuperação de palavras e desenho de relógio.

Objetivo:

Avaliar e comparar a precisão da triagem de Mini-Cog e Codex (exame de distúrbios cognitivos) para o diagnóstico de demência e comprometimento cognitivo leve (CCL) em pacientes atendidos em uma clínica dedicada a distúrbios cognitivos.

Métodos:

Os testes foram administrados a uma coorte consecutiva de 162 pacientes, cujos diagnósticos padrão de referência com base em critérios clínicos de diagnóstico foram demência (44), CCL (26) e queixa subjetiva de memória (92).

Resultados:

O Mini-Cog e o Codex apresentaram alta sensibilidade (>0,8) para o diagnóstico de demência, mas o Codex foi mais específico. Para o diagnóstico de CCL, o Mini-Cog teve melhor sensibilidade que o Codex. As comparações ponderadas de Mini-Cog e Codex mostraram apenas um benefício líquido marginal para o Mini-Cog para o diagnóstico de demência, mas um benefício líquido maior para o diagnóstico de CCL.

Conclusão:

Neste estudo pragmático, o Mini-Cog e o Codex foram testes breves de triagem precisos para demência, mas o Mini-Cog foi melhor para a identificação de CCL.
Subject(s)


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Main subject: Dementia Type of study: Diagnostic study / Prognostic study Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Dement. neuropsychol Journal subject: NEUROCIENCIAS / Neurology / Psychology / Psychiatry Year: 2020 Type: Article Affiliation country: United kingdom Institution/Affiliation country: Walton Centre for Neurology and Neurosurgery/GB

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Main subject: Dementia Type of study: Diagnostic study / Prognostic study Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Dement. neuropsychol Journal subject: NEUROCIENCIAS / Neurology / Psychology / Psychiatry Year: 2020 Type: Article Affiliation country: United kingdom Institution/Affiliation country: Walton Centre for Neurology and Neurosurgery/GB