Diagnostic Value of the Memory and Executive Function Screening Test in the Assessment of Cognitive Impairment Severity in Alzheimer's Disease

LI Xian-tao,ZHAO Qian-hua,GUO Qi-hao,HONG Zhen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-0678.2013.05.011
2013-01-01
Abstract:Aim To evaluate cognitive impairment profile in patients with mild cognitive impairment(MCI) and Alzheimer's disease(AD) of different severity with memory and execution screening(MES) scale and explore the clinical value in the differential diagnosis of severity of AD patients with MES. Methods A total of 709 subjects(164 cases in normal control group, 137 cases in MCI group, 193 cases in mild AD group, 136 cases in moderate AD group, 79 cases in severe AD group) were implemented the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and MES. Subjects were matched as regards to age, gender, educational level in each group. MMSE total scores and relevant indicators of MES were compared in each group. Genotyping of ApoE polymorphism was conducted on 621 subjects(NC, 136 cases; MCI, 116 cases; mild AD, 178 cases; moderate AD, 122 cases and severe AD, 69 cases) by amplification refractory mutation system(ARMS) with informed consent. Results Both MMSE total score and MES indexes showed a downward trend in these groups along with progression of cognitive impairment. There were significant differences in MMSE total scores, raw scores of ten items, factor scores and total scores of MES among the five groups during the pairwise comparisons(P<0.01). They all showed a relatively balanced decline except that scores in sentence 5(i.e., free recall after an interval of about five minutes) demonstrating the fastest decline, while the ratio of memory to execution function(MES-R) in each group remained relatively stable(P>0.05). The ability to learn did not change significantly between the normal control and MCI subjects, as well as between mild AD and moderate AD subjects(P>0.05), implicating a plateau phenomenon, nevertheless the memory retention capability presented with a relatively balanced decrease(P<0.01). There were no significant differences in total scores of either MES or MMSE between APOEε4 non-carriers group(223 cases) of AD patients and APOEε4 carriers group(146 cases) of AD patients, however APOEε4 non-carriers performed better on MES-M score than the APOEε4 carriers did while the MES-E showed the opposite direction, resulting a significantly different MES-R between these two groups(P<0.01). Conclusion MES is less time-consuming, less education-dependent and is able to provide a general profile of cognitive impairment regarding as episodic memory, executive function and other major cognitive domain, without ceiling or floor effects, with good resolution capability to patients with mild or severe cognitive impairment. It is easier to be carried out than CDR, and widely used to estimate AD severity.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?