The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A Brief Screening Tool For Mild Cognitive Impairment

Université de Sherbrooke, Шербрук, Quebec, Canada
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (Impact Factor: 4.57). 05/2005; 53(4):695-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x
Source: PubMed


To develop a 10-minute cognitive screening tool (Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA) to assist first-line physicians in detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a clinical state that often progresses to dementia.
Validation study.
A community clinic and an academic center.
Ninety-four patients meeting MCI clinical criteria supported by psychometric measures, 93 patients with mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) (Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score > or =17), and 90 healthy elderly controls (NC).
The MoCA and MMSE were administered to all participants, and sensitivity and specificity of both measures were assessed for detection of MCI and mild AD.
Using a cutoff score 26, the MMSE had a sensitivity of 18% to detect MCI, whereas the MoCA detected 90% of MCI subjects. In the mild AD group, the MMSE had a sensitivity of 78%, whereas the MoCA detected 100%. Specificity was excellent for both MMSE and MoCA (100% and 87%, respectively).
MCI as an entity is evolving and somewhat controversial. The MoCA is a brief cognitive screening tool with high sensitivity and specificity for detecting MCI as currently conceptualized in patients performing in the normal range on the MMSE.

Download full-text


Available from: Natalie A. Phillips
  • Source
    • "Participants needed to have a standard indoor/outdoor PW controlled by joystick . Other inclusion criteria consisted of: able to fully understand the tasks with a score of 13 or more on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment[17], have one able arm and hand for controlling the wheelchair, able to grasp at 40 cm forward and laterally, and normal or corrected vision . Potential participants were asked if they were able to perform the three tasks without assistance and only those who affirmed they could were recruited. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Powered wheelchair (PW) training involving combined navigation and reaching is often limited or unfeasible. Virtual reality (VR) simulators offer a feasible alternative for rehabilitation training either at home or in a clinical setting. This study evaluated a low-cost magnetic-based hand motion controller as an interface for reaching tasks within the McGill Immersive Wheelchair (miWe) simulator. Twelve experienced PW users performed three navigation-reaching tasks in the real world (RW) and in VR: working at a desk, using an elevator, and opening a door. The sense of presence in VR was assessed using the iGroup Presence Questionnaire (IPQ). We determined concordance of task performance in VR with that in the RW. A video task analysis was performed to analyse task behaviours. Compared to previous miWe data, IPQ scores were greater in the involvement domain (p < 0.05). Task analysis showed most of navigation and reaching behaviours as having moderate to excellent (K > 0.4, Cohen’s Kappa) agreement between the two environments, but greater (p < 0.05) risk of collisions and reaching errors in VR. VR performance demonstrated longer (p < 0.05) task times and more discreet movements for the elevator and desk tasks but not the door task. Task performance showed poorer kinematic performance in VR than RW but similar strategies. Therefore, the reaching component represents a promising addition to the miWe training simulator, though some limitations must be addressed in future development.
    Preview · Article · Dec 2016 · Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
  • Source
    • "(i) Physical property judgement (quantity), control questions: e.g. 'How many cups are there on the tray?' (ii) First person perspective taking: 'How many cups do YOU see in the front row?' (iii) Third person perspective taking animate: 'How many cups do I see in the front row?' (iv) Third person perspective taking inanimate: 'If the CAMERA took a picture, in the PICTURE, how many cups would be seen in the front row?'Brain, 1986); MOCA = The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (Nasreddine, 2005); Comb/razor test = tests of personal neglect (McIntoch et al., 2000; % bias = left – right strokes/ left + ambiguous + right strokes); Bisiach one item test = test of personal neglect; Visual fields and somatosensory = customary 'confrontation' technique = (Bisiach et al., 1986); line crossing, star cancellation, copy and representational drawing = conventional sub-tests of Behavioural Inattention Test (Wilson et al., 1987); FAB = Frontal Assessment Battery (Dubois et al., 2000); HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (Zigmond and Snaith, 1983). a Scores below tests' cut-off points or more than 1 standard deviation below average mean. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Following right-hemisphere damage, a specific disorder of motor awareness can occur called anosognosia for hemiplegia, i.e. the denial of motor deficits contralateral to a brain lesion. The study of anosognosia can offer unique insights into the neurocognitive basis of awareness. Typically, however, awareness is assessed as a first person judgement and the ability of patients to think about their bodies in more 'objective' (third person) terms is not directly assessed. This may be important as right-hemisphere spatial abilities may underlie our ability to take third person perspectives. This possibility was assessed for the first time in the present study. We investigated third person perspective taking using both visuospatial and verbal tasks in right-hemisphere stroke patients with anosognosia (n = 15) and without anosognosia (n = 15), as well as neurologically healthy control subjects (n = 15). The anosognosic group performed worse than both control groups when having to perform the tasks from a third versus a first person perspective. Individual analysis further revealed a classical dissociation between most anosognosic patients and control subjects in mental (but not visuospatial) third person perspective taking abilities. Finally, the severity of unawareness in anosognosia patients was correlated to greater impairments in such third person, mental perspective taking abilities (but not visuospatial perspective taking). In voxel-based lesion mapping we also identified the lesion sites linked with such deficits, including some brain areas previously associated with inhibition, perspective taking and mentalizing, such as the inferior and middle frontal gyri, as well as the supramarginal and superior temporal gyri. These results suggest that neurocognitive deficits in mental perspective taking may contribute to anosognosia and provide novel insights regarding the relation between self-awareness and social cognition.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2016 · Brain
    • "All participants in the aMCI group received MMSE, while a small subset of controls received MMSE (n = 5) and others received MOCA. We are mainly reporting MMSE and MOCA scores to show that participants in the aMCI and control groups[90]; MoCA: Montreal Cognitive Assess- ment[91]; COWAT: Controlled Oral Word Association Test[94]; Category fluency[95]; DS: digit span[98]; TMT: Trail Making Test[96]; LM: logical memory[97]. The numbers in the table are raw test scores. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We examined the effects of amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) on behavioral (response times and error rates) and scalp-recorded event-related potential (ERP) measures of response execution and inhibition, using Go/NoGo tasks involving basic and superordinate semantic categorization. Twenty-five aMCI (16 F; 68.5±8 years) and 25 age- and gender-matched normal control subjects (16 F; 65.4±7.1 years) completed two visual Go/NoGo tasks. In the single car task, responses were made based on single exemplars of a car (Go) and a dog (NoGo) (basic). In the object animal task, responses were based on multiple exemplars of objects (Go) and animals (NoGo) (superordinate). The aMCI subjects had higher commission errors on the NoGo trials compared to the control subjects, whereas both groups had comparable omission errors and reaction times during the Go trials. The aMCI subjects had significantly prolonged N2 ERP latency during Go and NoGo trials across tasks compared to the controls. Both groups showed similar categorization effects and response type effects in N2/P3 ERP latencies and P3 amplitude. Our findings indicate that altered early neural processing indexed by N2 latency distinguishes subjects with aMCI from controls during the Go/NoGo task. Prolonged Go-N2 latency in aMCI appears to precede behavioral changes in response execution, whereas prolonged NoGo-N2 latency underlies behavioral deterioration in response inhibition.
    No preview · Article · Jan 2016
Show more