DOI 10.1097/yct.0000000000000687
A Comparison of Computerized Versus Pen-and-Paper Cognitive Tests for Monitoring Electroconvulsive Therapy-Related Cognitive Side Effects.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
Cognitive side effects are a common unintended outcome of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). Routine cognitive assessment is important for monitoring patient outcomes, although it can pose challenges in busy clinical settings. Computerized cognitive testing has advantages that can facilitate routine monitoring. This study explored the construct and criterion validity of computerized cognitive testing compared with standard pen-and-paper tests for monitoring cognition in ECT patients.
METHODS
The study included 24 participants with major depression who received an acute course of ECT. Cognition was assessed at pretreatment and at posttreatment with 3 computerized tests from the CogState battery (International Shopping List task, One-Card Learning, and One-Back Task) and 3 conceptually matched pen-and-paper-administered neuropsychological tests.
RESULTS
At pretreatment, only performance on the computer-administered test of verbal anterograde memory (International Shopping List task) was significantly correlated with the analogous pen-and-paper measure, whereas the other computerized tests were not. Of the computerized measures, only the International Shopping List task showed significant changes from pretreatment to posttreatment (P < 0.01, Cohen d > 1.0). In contrast, all the pen-and-paper-administered tests showed significant changes from pretreatment to posttreatment (P < 0.01, Cohen d range, 0.8-1.2). Pretreatment to posttreatment cognitive changes on the computerized measures were not correlated with changes on the pen-and-paper-administered tests.
CONCLUSION
Construct and criterion validity and tolerability varied between the computerized measures. The results highlighted potentially important issues related to the interpretation and utility of computerized tests in this patient population.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.