Journal of the Korea Convergence Society (한국융합학회논문지)

Korea Convergence Society (한국융합학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Prediction Performance of Naming Tests for Differentiating Mild Cognitive Impairment and Mild Dementia

경도인지장애와 경도 치매의 감별을 위한 대면 이름대기와 범주 이름대기의 예측 성능 비교

  • Byeon, Haewon (Department of Speech Language Pathology, Honam University)
  • 변해원 (호남대학교 보건과학대학 언어치료학과)
  • Received : 2020.03.12
  • Accepted : 2020.05.20
  • Published : 2020.05.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The present study identify the predictive power of confrontational naming and generative naming as screening tests for normal and early cognitive impairment. The subjects were analyzed for 203 healthy elderly, 106 mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 31 mild dementia. The confrontational naming was measured by the short-term Korean Boston Name Waiting Test, and the generative naming was measured by the Control Associative Word Test. As a result of polynomial logistic regression, both confrontational naming and generative naming had a significant effect on discriminating cognitive impairment (MCI, mild dementia) in general elderly (p<0.05). On the other hand, when distinguishing mild dementia from mild cognitive impairment, the generative naming-phonetic test had no significant odds ratio. The results of this study suggest that when discriminating mild dementia in mild cognitive impairment group, it is not meaningful to look only at the total score of generative naming test.

본 연구는 정상 노인과 초기 단계의 노년기 인지 장애(경도인지장애(MCI), 경도 치매)의 선별검사인 대면 이름대기와 범주 이름대기의 예측력을 파악하였다. 노년기 인지장애로 진단을 받은 340명(정상 노인 203명, MCI 106명, 경도 치매 31명)을 분석하였다. 대면 이름대기는 단축형 한국판 보스턴 이름대기 검사로 측정하였고, 범주 이름대기는 통제연상단어검사의 의미검사와 음소검사를 이용하여 측정하였다. 이름대기 검사의 예측 성능을 비교하고자 다항 로지스틱 회귀분석을 수행한 결과, 대면 이름대기와 범주 이름대기 검사 모두 일반노인에서 MCI와 경도 치매를 감별하는데 유의미한 효과가 확인되었다(p<0.05). 반면, MCI에서 경도 치매를 감별할 때, 범주 이름대기의 음소검사는 교차비가 유의미하지 않았다. 본 연구의 결과는 MCI에서 경도 치매를 감별할 때, 범주 이름대기의 총점만을 측정기준으로 분석하는 것은 유의하지 않을 가능성이 높음을 시사한다.

Keywords

References

  1. M. H. Connors, L. Quinto & H. Brodaty. (2019). Longitudinal outcomes of patients with pseudodementia: a systematic review. Psychological medicine, 49(5), 727-737. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291718002829.
  2. S. H. Baik, J. S. Won & M. C. Kim. (2017). A Convergence Study of Korean Adults' Awareness and Attitudes toward Dementia. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 8(9), 191-197. DOI : 10.15207/JKCS.2017.8.9.191.
  3. D. R. Kim. (2017). An Integrative Review of Non-pharmacological Intervention in Elderly Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 8(5), 243-253. DOI : 10.15207/JKCS.2017.8.5.243.
  4. M. F. Weiner, K. E. Neubecker, M. E. Bret & L. S. Hynan. (2008). Language in Alzheimer's disease. The Journal of clinical psychiatry, 69(8), 1223-1227. DOI : 10.4088/JCP.v69n0804.
  5. H. Byeon. (2019). The effect of computer based cognitive rehabilitation program on the improvement of generative naming in the elderly with mild dementia : preliminary study. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 10(9), 167-172. DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.15207/JKCS.2019.10.9.167.
  6. D. B. Cooper, L. H. Lacritz, M. F. Weiner, R. N. Rosenberg & C. Cullum. (2004). Category fluency in mild cognitive impairment: Reduced effect of practice in test-retest conditions. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 18(3), 120-122. DOI : 10.1097/01.wad.0000127442.15689.92.
  7. K. Rascovsky, D. P. Salmon, L. A. Hansen, L. J. Thal & D. Galasko. (2007). Disparate letter and semantic category fluency deficits in autopsy-confirmed frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Neuropsychology, 21(1), 20-30. DOI : 10.1037/0894-4105.21.1.20.
  8. A. L. Adlam, S. Bozeat, R. Arnold, P. Watson & J. R. Hodges. (2006). Semantic knowledge in mild cognitive impairment and mild Alzheimer's disease. Cortex, 42(5), 675-684. DOI : 10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70404-0.
  9. S. Jahng, D. L. Na & Y. Kang. (2015). Constructing a composite score for the Seoul neuropsychological screening battery-core. Dementia and Neurocognitive Disorders, 14(4), 137-142. DOI : 10.12779/dnd.2015.14.4.137.
  10. J. Guarch, T. Marcos, M. Salamero & R. Blesa. (2004). Neuropsychological markers of dementia in patients with memory complaints. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 19(4), 352-358. DOI : 10.1002/gps.1074.
  11. D. P. Salmon, R. G. Thomas, M. M. Pay, A. Booth, C. R. Hofstetter, L. J. Thal & R. Katzman. (2002). Alzheimer's disease can be accurately diagnosed in very mildly impaired individuals. Neurology, 59(7), 1022-1028. DOI : 10.1212/wnl.59.7.1022.
  12. B. McGuinness, S. L. Barrett, D. Craig, J. Lawson & A. P. Passmore. (2010). Executive functioning in Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 25(6), 562-568. DOI : 10.1002/gps.2375.
  13. A. Vogel, A. Gade, J. Stokholm & G. Waldemar. (2005). Semantic memory impairment in the earliest phases of Alzheimer's disease. Dementia And Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 19(2-3), 75-81. DOI : 10.1159/000082352.
  14. T. Dwolatzky, V. Whitehead, G. M. Doniger, E. S. Simon, A. Schweiger, D. Jaffe & H. Chertkow. (2003). Validity of a novel computerized cognitive battery for mild cognitive impairment. BMC Geriatrics, 3(1), e4. DOI : 10.1186/1471-2318-3-4.
  15. M. A. Lambon Ralph, K. Patterson, N. Graham, K. Dawson & J. R. Hodges. (2003). Homogeneity and heterogeneity in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study of 55 cases. Brain, 126(Pt 11), 2350-2362. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awg236.