Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cognitive Screening

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Practical Psychology in Medical Rehabilitation

  • 2274 Accesses

Abstract

The purpose, content and limitations of cognitive screening in medical and rehabilitation settings is discussed in this chapter. A table listing essential information (e.g., target populations, administration time, response mode) for common assessment tools is provided. Cautions are offered concerning limitations of screening instruments related to test characteristics, settings and patient characteristics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Note, however, that learning and retaining verbal material such as story content or word lists differs from the “procedural learning” required in physical and occupational therapies.

  2. 2.

    However, some studies have shown little intermanual difference in performance of such tasks as the Trail Making Test, suggesting that useful data may be obtained from persons with hemiplegia who use their unaffected (even if nondominant) hand (e.g., [5]).

References

  1. Larner A. Cognitive screening instruments. London: Springer; 2013.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Phillips N, Mate-Kole C. Cognitive deficits in peripheral vascular disease: a comparison of mild stroke patients and normal control subjects. Stroke. 1997;28(4):777–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Armstrong C, Morrow L. Handbook of medical neuropsychology. New York: Springer; 2010.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Connick P, Kolappan M, Bak T, Chandran S. Verbal fluency as a rapid screening test for cognitive impairment in progressive multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2012;83(3):346–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. LoSasso G, Rapport L, Axelrod B, Reeder K. Intermanual and alternate-form equivalence on the Trail Making Test. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1998;20:107–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Caplan B, Shechter J. Test accommodations in geriatric neuropsychology. In: Bush SS, Martin TA, editors. Geriatric neuropsychology: practice essentials. New York: Psychology Press; 2005

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hill-Briggs F, Dial J, Morere D, Joyce A. Neuropsychological assessment of persons with physical disability, visual impairment, or blindness, and hearing impairment or deafness. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2007;22:389–404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Caplan B, Shechter J. Reflections on the “depressed,” “unrealistic,” “inappropriate,” “manipulative,” “unmotivated,” “noncompliant,” “denying,” “maladjusted,” “regressed,” etc. patient. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:1123–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gans J. Hate in the rehabilitation setting. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1983;64(4):176–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lezak M, Howieson D, Bigler E, Tranel D. Neuropsychological assessment. 5th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nasreddine Z, Phillips N, Bedirian V, Charbonneau S, Whitehead C, Collin I, et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53:695–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Folstein MF, Foplstein SE, McHugh PR. Mini-mental state: a practical method for grading cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12:189–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Teng E, Chui H. The modified mini-mental state (3MS) examination. J Clin Psychiatry. 1987;48:314–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Randolph C. RBANS manual: repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mattis S. Dementia rating scale-2 (DRS-2). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kiernan R, Mueller J, Langsto J. Cognistat assessment system. Cognistat. Novatek International (www.cognistat.com); 2010.

  17. PsychCorp. Wechsler memory scale—(WMS-IV) technical and interpretive manual. 4th ed. San Antonio, TX: Pearson; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Stern RA, White T. Neuropsychological assessment battery. Lutz: Psychological Assessment Resources; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Levin H, O’Donnell V, Grossman R. The Galveston orientation and amnesia test. A practical scale to assess cognition after head injury. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1979;167:675–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Jackson W, Novak T, Fowler R. Effective serial measurement of cognitive orientation in rehabilitation: reliability of the orientation log. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;79:718–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Alderson A, Novak T. Reliable serial measurement of cognitive processes in rehabilitation: the cognitive log. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84:668–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ely EW, Inouye SK, Bernard GR, et al. Delirium in mechanically ventilated patients: validity and reliability of the confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit (CAM-ICU). JAMA. 2001;286:2703–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Independent Practice, Wynnewood, PA, USA

    Terrie Price Ph.D., ABPP

  2. The Rehabilitation Institute of Kansas City, 3011 Baltimore, Kansas City, MO, 64108, USA

    Bruce Caplan Ph.D., ABPP

Authors
  1. Terrie Price Ph.D., ABPP
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bruce Caplan Ph.D., ABPP
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Terrie Price Ph.D., ABPP .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Maggi A. Budd

  2. Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Sigmund Hough

  3. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

    Stephen T. Wegener

  4. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

    William Stiers

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Price, T., Caplan, B. (2017). Cognitive Screening. In: Budd, M., Hough, S., Wegener, S., Stiers, W. (eds) Practical Psychology in Medical Rehabilitation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-34034-0_43

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-34034-0_43

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-34032-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-34034-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation