Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised Research Articles

A systematic review of the accuracy and clinical utility of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination and the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination—Revised in the diagnosis of dementia

To review the evidence relating to the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE) and its updated version, the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) in relation to the diagnosis of dementia. A systematic search of relevant databases was conducted, covering the period 2000 to April 2010. Specific journals and reference lists were hand searched. Identified studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were reviewed using a tailored, methodological quality rating checklist. The systematic search process identified nine studies for review (seven relating to the ACE, two on the ACE-R). Strengths and weaknesses across studies are considered, and diagnostic accuracy measures are presented for six out of the nine studies. The evidence suggests that the ACE/ACE-R is capable of providing information on a range of cognitive domains and of differentiating well between those with and those without cognitive impairment. Further research examining how the tools distinguish between dementia subtypes and mild cognitive impairment will further benefit the evidence base.

A comparison of screening tools for the assessment of Mild Cognitive Impairment: Preliminary findings

We report a pilot investigation into the utility of screening tools in Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). The Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the novel Computer-Administered Neuropsychological Screen for Mild Cognitive Impairment (CANS-MCI) were administered to 20 elderly controls and 15 MCI cases. Non-parametric Mann–Whitney U-tests showed significant differences between groups (p < .0001) on the CANS-MCI and MoCA. The ACE-R and MoCA total scores showed high sensitivity (90%) to MCI. Area under the curve was consistently significant in discriminating controls and MCI for memory scores across all screening instruments. A useful profile of quantitative and qualitative information pertaining to cognitive functioning in MCI can be obtained with the MoCA, ACE-R, and CANS-MCI.

Abnormal retinal vascular function and cognitive loss in Alzheimer's Disease patients

AbstractPurpose To identify signs of abnormal retinal vascular function and their relationship to cognition deficits in newly diagnosed mild AD patientsMethods Retinal arterial and venous reaction times to flickering light were assessed in 10 AD patients and 28 age‐matched healthy individuals by means of Dynamic Vessels Analysis (DVA). Minimental state examination (MMSE) and Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination‐Revised (ACE‐R), as well as blood pressure measurements and blood analyses for lipid metabolism markers were also performed in patients and controls.Results AD patients demonstrated differences in their vascular reaction times to repeated cycles of flicker exposure at the retinal arterial level compared with healthy controls, which correlated with the degree of the patients’ cognitive impairment at the time of the testConclusion It proposed that a simple screening of the retinal vascular function could offer valuable information about risk for future vascular complications as well as progressive cognitive decline in newly diagnosed patients suffering from mild AD.

Utility and Limitations of Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-Revised for Detecting Mild Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson’s Disease

Background/Aims: To evaluate the utility of the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) as a screening tool for mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease (PD-MCI). Methods: PD patients underwent comprehensive neuropsychological and neurological evaluations and ACE-R assessment. Results: The ACE-R was superior to the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE) in detecting PD-MCI, with a cutoff score of ≤93 offering a sensitivity of 61% and a specificity of 64%. The utility of the ACE-R in detecting PD-MCI is largely influenced by the fluency sub-domain score, and has optimal discriminability when utilized in patients with lower levels of education (≤12 years of formal schooling). Conclusion: The ACE-R must be used cautiously as a screening tool for PD-MCI, with results being most influenced by its fluency sub-domain score and patient education levels.

Screening for Cognitive Dysfunction in Corticobasal Syndrome: Utility of Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination

Introduction: The motor features of corticobasal syndrome (CBS) are well recognized but the fact that many, if not all, affected patients develop cognitive impairment is still underrecognized. The dementia of CBS overlaps most with a language variant of frontotemporal dementia: progressive nonfluent aphasia (PNFA). The aim of this study was to determine the usefulness of Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) in the evaluation of CBS and to document similarities and differences between CBS and PNFA. Materials and Methods: Patients with well-defined CBS or PNFA from two tertiary referral centers were selected along with matched controls. Results: Twenty-one patients with CBS, 23 patients with PNFA and 47 age- and education- matched controls were included. Both CBS and PNFA groups showed substantial impairment on the ACE-R (f = 17.3–80.2, p < 0.001) and were significantly impaired in all domains (p < 0.001). The only significant difference between CBS and PNFA was in the visuospatial domain (p < 0.009), being worse in CBS. Using a cutoff of 88/89 out of 100, 90% of CBS and 82.6% of PNFA patients were impaired. At this cutoff of 88/89, ACE-R in CBS had sensitivity and specificity values of 91 and 98%, respectively.

Validation of the language component of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination - Revised (ACE-R) as a screening tool for aphasia in stroke patients

Several tests are available for aphasia screening following stroke. However, some of them have shortcomings such as need of specialist knowledge, low sensitivity and/or specificity and lengthy administration time. Our study aims to evaluate the language component of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination--Revised (ACE-R) as a screening tool for aphasia in stroke patients. The language component of ACE-R was administered to consecutive patients admitted to a post-acute stroke unit. Patients who were medically unstable or had a significant history of sensory impairment or mental health issues were excluded. The test was administered by two junior doctors with basic training in ACE-R administration. Patients recruited were also assessed by an experienced speech and language therapist (SLT). The results of the two assessments were documented by a different member of the team and the SLT results were used as the benchmark to calculate the ACE-R language component sensitivity and specificity. Fifty-nine participants were recruited and 27 of them were women. The mean age was 72 (SD 11.9). Thirty-four participants had left and 11 right hemisphere stroke. Fourteen had bilateral affection. Six participants were left handed. A cut-off value of 22/26 of ACE-R language component showed 100% specificity and 83.1% sensitivity, while a cut-off value of 16/26 had 88.2% specificity and 100% sensitivity. Our results suggest that the language component of ACE-R has a satisfactory sensitivity and specificity compared with other screening tests used in strokes. It is easy to administer and free to use.

Validación de la versión en español del Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revisado (ACE-R)

Background The Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination Revised (ACE-R) is an improved version of the earlier brief screening test which has been validated in English with high sensitivity and specificity to detect cognitive dysfunction. The aim of this study was to validate the Spanish version of the ACE-R in an Argentine population. Methods A group of patients with Alzheimer Disease (AD) and patients with behavioural variant Frontotemporal Dementia (bvFTD) paired by age, sex, and years of education with healthy controls were assessed using the ACE-R. Stage of dementia was measured with the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR). The English version of the ACE-R was first translated into Spanish and then back-translated into English by two blind independent experts. Results Internal reliability was very good (Cronbach's alpha = 0.89). Concurrent validity, determined by the correlation between total ACE-R and CDR was significant ( P < .001) and inter-rater reliability was excellent (Cohen's kappa = 0.98). Controls significantly outperformed AD and bvFTD patients on most subdomains of the ACE-R, with significant differences between the dementia groups. With a cut-off score of 85 points, sensitivity was 97.5% and specificity was 88.5%, with a likelihood ratio of 99.3 for the detection of dementia. The ACE-R showed higher sensitivity than the MMSE for the detection of dementia. Conclusions The Spanish version of the ACE-R is a brief yet reliable screening tool for the detection of early cognitive impairment and has shown to discriminate between bvFTD and AD.

Validation of the Spanish Version of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R)

Background The Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination Revised (ACE-R) is an improved version of the earlier brief screening test which has been validated in English with high sensitivity and specificity to detect cognitive dysfunction. The aim of this study was to validate the Spanish version of the ACE-R in an Argentine population. Methods A group of patients with Alzheimer Disease (AD) and patients with behavioural variant Frontotemporal Dementia (bvFTD) paired by age, sex, and years of education with healthy controls were assessed using the ACE-R. Stage of dementia was measured with the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR). The English version of the ACE-R was first translated into Spanish and then back-translated into English by two blind independent experts. Results Internal reliability was very good (Cronbach's alpha=0.89). Concurrent validity, determined by the correlation between total ACE-R and CDR was significant ( P<.001) and inter-rater reliability was excellent (Cohen's kappa=0.98). Controls significantly outperformed AD and bvFTD patients on most subdomains of the ACE-R, with significant differences between the dementia groups. With a cut-off score of 85 points, sensitivity was 97.5% and specificity was 88.5%, with a likelihood ratio of 99.3 for the detection of dementia. The ACE-R showed higher sensitivity than the MMSE for the detection of dementia. Conclusions The Spanish version of the ACE-R is a brief yet reliable screening tool for the detection of early cognitive impairment and has shown to discriminate between bvFTD and AD.

Elderly online: Effects of a digital inclusion program in cognitive performance

There is little empirical data about the impact of digital inclusion on cognition among older adults. This paper aimed at investigating the effects of a digital inclusion program in the cognitive performance of older individuals who participated in a computer learning workshop named “Idosos On-Line” (Elderly Online). Forty-two aged individuals participated in the research study: 22 completed the computer training workshop and 20 constituted the control group. All subjects answered a sociodemographic questionnaire and completed the Addenbrooke's cognitive examination, revised (ACE-R), which examines five cognitive domains: orientation and attention, memory, verbal fluency, language, and visuo-spatial skills. It was noted that the experimental group's cognitive performance significantly improved after the program, particularly in the language and memory domains, when compared to the control group. These findings suggest that the acquisition of new knowledge and the use of a new tool, that makes it possible to access the Internet, may bring gains to cognition.

POS05 Impairment on Montreal Cognitive Assessment in transient ischaemic attack and stroke patients with normal Mini-Mental State Examination score is clinically relevant

BackgroundWe have shown that over 50% of transient ischaemic attack (TIA) and stroke patients with MMSE≥27, score below the cut-off for normal cognitive function on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)....

Utility of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination - Revised for the diagnosis of dementia syndromes

To evaluate the utility of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination--Revised (ACE-R) as a screening tool for dementia. Prospective audit of 122 patients (82 with dementia, 40 with no dementia) referred to a Sydney cognition clinic. An ACE-R cut-off score of 84/100 provided an optimal balance of sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (0.85, 0.80 and 0.90, respectively) in identifying patients with dementia. In our sample, the ACE-R was a superior dementia screening tool to the Mini-Mental State Examination in patients with higher levels of education (≥ 10 years of formal schooling), but not in patients with lower levels of education. Patients misclassified by the instrument had evidence of high levels of education, focal executive dysfunction, medical comorbidities, significant vascular disease and polypharmacology. The ACE-R is a useful screening tool for detecting the presence of dementia in a cognition clinic setting. Caution may be warranted in some patient populations.

Korean Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination Revised (K‐ACER) for differential diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and subcortical ischemic vascular dementia

Sensitive, specific neuropsychological screening tests, such as the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination Revised (ACE-R), are essential for dementia diagnosis. We aimed to validate the use of the Korean version of ACE-R (K-ACER) to differentiate Alzheimer's disease (AD) from subcortical ischemic vascular dementia (SIVD). Standard tests for dementia screening were applied to 156 subjects (84 controls, 30 AD, 42 SIVD), and total and sub-domain scores on the K-ACER, as well as the sub-domain ratio (VLOM), were compared. The reliability of the K-ACER was very good (α-coefficient 0.84), and cut-off score for dementia was determined (cut-off value 78, sensitivity 0.93, specificity 0.95). The likelihood ratio for dementia was calculated as between 78 and 82. At a cut-off of 78, the likelihood of dementia was 18.6:1. Although a comparison of K-ACER scores between AD and SIVD patients revealed significant differences in verbal fluency, language domain and VLOM ratio, sensitivity and specificity for differential diagnosis between AD and SVID proved less accurate. The K-ACER is a rapid, sensitive and specific dementia screening test. Though sub-domains of items may be useful for differentiating between AD and SIVD, sensitivity and specificity is less accurate than dementia screening itself.

Brazilian Version of the Addenbrooke Cognitive Examination-revised in the Diagnosis of Mild Alzheimer Disease

To investigate the accuracy of the Brazilian version of the Addenbrooke Cognitive Examination-revised (ACE-R) in the diagnosis of mild Alzheimer disease (AD). The ACE-R is an accurate and brief cognitive battery for the detection of mild dementia, especially for the discrimination between AD and frontotemporal dementia. The battery was administered to 31 patients with mild AD and 62 age-matched and education-matched cognitively healthy controls. Both groups were selected using the Dementia Rating Scale and were submitted to the ACE-R. Depression was ruled out in both groups by the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia. The performance of patients and controls in the ACE-R was compared and receiver operator characteristic curve analysis was undertaken to ascertain the accuracy of the instrument for the diagnosis of mild AD. The mean scores at the ACE-R were 63.10+/-10.22 points for patients with AD and 83.63+/-7.90 points for controls. The cut-off score <78 yielded high diagnostic accuracy (receiver operator characteristic area under the curve=0.947), with 100% sensitivity, 82.26% specificity, 73.8% positive predictive value, and 100% negative predictive value. The Brazilian version of the ACE-R displayed high diagnostic accuracy for the identification of mild AD in the studied sample.

Errorless learning is superior to trial and error when learning a practical skill in rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial

Objective: Errorless learning is an effective strategy for the cognitive rehabilitation of memory impairment, but there is little evidence to support its use for skill learning. This preliminary study investigates whether errorless learning is superior to treatment as usual (trial and error), when teaching people with amputations and comorbid risk of vascular cognitive impairment to fit a prosthetic limb. Design: A randomized control design. Setting: A regional limb-fitting clinic at the West of Scotland Mobility and Rehabilitation Centre in Glasgow. Participants: Thirty adults with transtibial amputations, recruited from a regional limb-fitting clinic. Of these 42% were cognitively impaired. Intervention: Random assignment to an errorless learning intervention (n = 15) or a treatment as usual control (n = 15). There were five training trials within a single session. Participants were then asked to fit their limb without assistance. Main measures: Performance was scored from videotape recording of the first occasion when the participant attempted to fit their limb without assistance. Addenbrookes Cognitive Examination — Revised (ACE-R) was used to assess general cognitive functioning. Results: The errorless learning group remembered more correct steps (mean 90.9, SD 12.1) than the control group (77.9; 8.4; P<0.001) and made fewer errors (mean 0.93, SD 1.3) than controls (2.1; 0.95); P =0.002). Conclusions: Errorless learning can benefit people with amputations in learning the practical skill of fitting a prosthetic limb. Further study that includes follow-up is warranted.

Pilot study of a three‐step diagnostic pathway for young and old patients with Parkinson's disease dementia: screen, test and then diagnose

To pilot a three-step diagnostic model for young and old patients with Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD). Prospective investigator-blinded study. We developed a screening questionnaire for patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) and their caregivers. Further, patients were subjected to three screening instruments (Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB), Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-revised (ACE-R) and a detailed neuropsychological examination (NPE). Based on the NPE, patients were divided in a PD (without dementia) and a PDD-group. Forty-one PD patients, aged 37-94 years, participated in this study. Patients were divided in a young group, < or = 65 (n = 22) and an old group >65 years (n = 19). In the young group (PDD, n = 5) the patient-screening questionnaire predicted PDD with a sensitivity/specificity of 100.0%/94.1%; in the old group (PDD, n = 10) the proxy-screening questionnaire predicted PDD with a sensitivity/specificity of 88.9%/66.7%. In the young group, ACE-R had the largest Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0.88 (0.70-1.00), in the old group MoCA (AUC 1.00). However, the three instruments did not differ significantly. It seems feasible and efficient to use three consecutive diagnostic steps for PDD: (1) a screening questionnaire, (2) if positive: MoCA, FAB or ACE-R as screening instrument and (3) if positive: a detailed NPE for diagnosing PDD.

Diagnostic utility of the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) and its combination with the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) in a memory clinic-based population

The study aimed to assess the clinical utility of the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) in patients referred to memory clinics, alone and in combination with the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) and the Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE). This pragmatic prospective study was based on consecutive referrals attending with an informant (n = 144) to two memory clinics over a 12-month period. Patients were diagnosed using standard clinical diagnostic criteria for dementia (DSM-IV) as gold standard (dementia prevalence = 59%). The IQCODE was administered to informants, and the ACE-R and/or MMSE to most patients. The IQCODE proved acceptable to informants, and was quick and easy to use. Using traditional parameters of diagnostic utility (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, likelihood ratios), the performance of the IQCODE at optimal test accuracy was highly sensitive (0.86) for the diagnosis of dementia but specificity was poor (0.39) with suboptimal positive predictive value (0.67) and small or unimportant likelihood ratios. Overall diagnostic accuracy based on area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.71. Combining the IQCODE with either ACE-R or MMSE greatly improved accuracy, specificity and positive predictive value when the tests were used in series, but not when used in parallel. In a memory clinic based population, the IQCODE proved sensitive for the diagnosis of dementia but overall diagnostic accuracy was suboptimal. Combining the IQCODE in series with the ACE-R or MMSE greatly improved diagnostic utility.

Self administered cognitive screening test (TYM) for detection of Alzheimer’s disease: cross sectional study

Objective To evaluate a cognitive test, the TYM (“test your memory”), in the detection of Alzheimer’s disease.Design Cross sectional study.Setting Outpatient departments in three hospitals, including a memory clinic.Participants 540...

Evaluation of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination's validity in a brain injury rehabilitation setting

Background: Several reports have warned of the Mini Mental State Examination's (MMSE) inability to detect gross memory and high executive impairments. Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination–Revised (ACE-R) has gained enormous popularity in dementia screening as it addresses the main shortcomings of MMSE.Aim: This study aimed at evaluating the use of ACE-R and to establish its sensitivity compared to MMSE in a cohort of brain injury patients.Method: ACE-R was administered to a cohort of chronic brain injury patients. All patients had a cognitive impairment which was severe enough to prevent them working or studying. Patients with significant mental health, sensory, communication or physical impairments were excluded.Results: Thirty-six patients were recruited, 31 males with a mean age of 37 years. For an upper cut-off value of 27/30 for MMSE and 88/100 for ACE-R, their sensitivities were 36% and 72%, respectively. For a lower cut-off value of 24/30 and 82/100 the tests sensitivities were 11% and 56%, respectively. Analysis of the ACE-R sub-tests indicated that memory and verbal fluency sub-tests showed the most dramatic impairment.Conclusion: MMSE is insensitive as a screening test in brain injury patients. The results show ACE-R to be a sensitive, easily administered test.

Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) in day-to-day clinical practice

Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) in day-to-day clinical practice

Brazilian adaptation of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R).

The Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) is a highly sensitive and specific tool for the detection of mild dementia. It is particularly useful in differentiating Alzheimer’s disease from frontotemporal dementia. While the first version of the test battery has been adapted in many countries, its revised version has not, probably because it was published very recently.ObjectiveTo translate and adapt the ACE-R for use in the Brazilian population.MethodsTwo independent translations were made from English into Portuguese, followed by two independent back-translations. Few adaptations in accordance to the Brazilian culture and language were made and a first version of the instrument produced. This former version of the ACE-R was administered to 21 cognitively healthy subjects aged 60 years or more, with different educational levels.ResultsThe mean age of the studied sample of healthy elderly was 75.4 years (ranging from 60 to 89 years). Small additional modifications were necessary after the evaluation of the first ten subjects in order to improve comprehension of the test. The final Portuguese version of the ACE-R was produced and was found to be well understood by the remaining 11 subjects, taking an average of 15 minutes to be administered.ConclusionsThe Brazilian version of the ACE-R proved to be a promising cognitive instrument for testing both in research and clinical settings. With this regard, additional studies are currently being carried out in our unit in order to investigate the diagnostic properties of the ACE-R in our milieu.