Validity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Screener in Adolescents and Young Adults With and Without Congenital Heart Disease.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive deficits are common, long-term sequelae in children and adolescents with congenital heart disease (CHD) who have undergone surgical palliation. However, there is a lack of a validated brief cognitive screening tool appropriate for the outpatient setting for adolescents with CHD. One candidate instrument is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) questionnaire. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the research was to validate scores from the MoCA against the General Memory Index (GMI) of the Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning, 2nd Edition (WRAML2), a widely accepted measure of cognition/memory, in adolescents and young adults with CHD. METHODS: We administered the MoCA and the WRAML2 to 156 adolescents and young adults ages 14-21 (80 youth with CHD and 76 healthy controls who were gender and age matched). Spearman's rank order correlations were used to assess concurrent validity. To assess construct validity, the Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare differences in scores in youth with CHD and the healthy control group. Receiver operating characteristic curves were created and area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were also calculated. RESULTS: The MoCA median scores in the CHD versus healthy controls were (23, range 15-29 vs. 28, range 22-30; p < .001), respectively. With the screening cutoff scores at <26 points for the MoCA and 85 for GMI (<1 SD, M = 100, SD = 15), the CHD versus healthy control groups showed sensitivity of .96 and specificity of .67 versus sensitivity of .75 and specificity of .90, respectively, in the detection of cognitive deficits. A cutoff score of 26 on the MoCA was optimal in the CHD group; a cutoff of 25 had similar properties except for a lower negative predictive value. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (95% CI) for the MoCA was 0.84 (95% CI [0.75, 0.93], p < .001) and 0.84 (95% CI [0.62, 1.00], p = .02) for the CHD and controls, respectively. DISCUSSION: Scores on the MoCA were valid for screening to detect cognitive deficits in adolescents and young adults aged 14-21 with CHD when a cutoff score of 26 is used to differentiate youth with and without significant cognitive impairment. Future studies are needed in other adolescent disease groups with known cognitive deficits and healthy populations to explore the generalizability of validity of MoCA scores in adolescents and young adults.

Predictors of Memory Deficits in Adolescents and Young Adults with Congenital Heart Disease Compared to Healthy Controls.

INTRODUCTION: Adolescents and young adults with congenital heart disease (CHD) show a range of memory deficits, which can dramatically impact their clinical outcomes and quality of life. However, few studies have identified predictors of these memory changes. The purpose of this investigation was to identify predictors of memory deficits in adolescents and young adults with CHD after surgical palliation compared to healthy controls. METHOD: One hundred fifty-six adolescents and young adults (80 CHD and 76 controls; age 14-21 years) were recruited and administered an instrument to assess memory [Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning Second Edition - general memory index (GMI) score] and completed questionnaires that measure anxiety, depression, sleepiness, health status, and self-efficacy. Descriptive and non-parametric statistics were used to assess group differences, and logistic regression to identify predictors of memory deficits. RESULTS: CHD subjects consisted of 58% males, median age 17 years, 43% Hispanic, and medians of 2 previous heart surgeries and 14 years since last surgery. Memory deficits (GMI ≤ 85) were identified in 50% CHD compared to 4% healthy controls (median GMI 85 vs. 104, p < 0.001). Of GMI subscale medians, CHD subjects had significantly worse memory performance vs. healthy controls (verbal 88 vs. 105, p < 0.001; attention 88 vs. 109, p < 0.001; working memory 86 vs. 108, p < 0.001). No significant differences appeared between groups for visual memory. Multiple clinical and psychosocial factors were identified which were statistically different on bivariate analyses between the subjects with and without memory deficits. By multivariate analysis, male gender, number of surgeries, anxiety, and self-efficacy emerged as independent predictors of memory deficits. CONCLUSION: Adolescents and young adults with CHD, more than a decade since their last surgery, show significant verbal, attention, and working memory deficits over controls. To enhance patient memory/self-care, clinicians should explore ways to reduce anxiety, improve self-efficacy, and increase use of visual patient education material, especially in CHD males.

Otoacoustic emissions: a valid, efficient first-line hearing screen for preschool children.

BACKGROUND: Normal hearing during the preschool years is essential for speech, language, social, emotional, and preacademic development. Children of low socioeconomic status may be particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of late identification and intervention. While a mass-screening effort focused on preschool children does not have broad support, focused screening remains important to identify children at risk. This project was conducted to address 3 primary aims: develop and implement an initial hearing screen using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) for at-risk preschoolers, verify speed and tolerability of the screen, and assess the test performance of TEOAEs screening compared to pure tone audiometry in a group of 142 preschool children. METHODS: A total of 744 preschool children attending preschools in an underserved, urban community completed TEOAEs screening by a school nurse. A secondary cohort of 142 children was screened first by TEOAEs and then followed by pure tone audiometry and results compared. RESULTS: A total of 680 children passed screening. Forty-one children (5.5%) had a "refer" result. Two-year-olds had the highest refusal rate (10.5%). Mean testing time was 43 seconds per ear. Secondary cohort analysis revealed 1 subject did not pass either TEOAEs or pure tone screening; no subject passed TEOAEs and then did not pass pure tone audiometry. TEOAEs screening test sensitivity was 1.00 (95% confidence interval 0.054-1.00) and specificity 0.94 (0.88-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: TEOAEs screening performed by school nurses is a fast, efficient, and feasible model. Children who pass TEOAEs screening have a very high likelihood of being free from hearing impairment. Application may be particularly relevant in underserved communities.