Premium
P‐122: Repeated administration of RAVLT differentiates MCI from MCI that reverts to normal
Author(s) -
Antuono Piero,
Jones Jennifer,
Wu Zhilin,
Xu Guofan,
Franczak Malgorzata,
Li Shi-Jiang
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
alzheimer's and dementia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.713
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1552-5279
pISSN - 1552-5260
DOI - 10.1016/j.jalz.2007.04.186
Subject(s) - forgetting , audiology , psychology , recall , neuropsychology , medicine , episodic memory , cognition , cardiology , psychiatry , cognitive psychology
Background: Individuals with MCI are at greater risk for progressing to Alzheimer’s disease, however, studies have shown instability in MCI classification, with some subjects declining, some improving, and some remaining stable over time. A large cohort of individuals who are diagnosed with MCI based on a single neuropsychological assessment subsequently revert to normal. Multiple assessments over time improve the reliability of MCI diagnosis. The Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) is an episodic memory test that is brief, easy to administer, and demonstrates relative stability over time in healthy older adults. Repeated administration of the RAVLT may improve MCI classification. Objective(s): To determine whether repeated administration of the RAVLT differentiates subjects with MCI from subjects who were initially diagnosed with MCI but subsequently revert to normal. Methods: This study was part of a larger multi-year longitudinal study in which all subjects were evaluated annually. 40 subjects were consistently classified as cognitively normal (CN) for three consecutive years, 17 were classified as MCI, and 9 were initially diagnosed with MCI but subsequently revered to normal (rMCI). MCI diagnosis was based on the Petersen criteria. The RAVLT was administered at baseline and at each annual follow-up. Results: At baseline, MCI and rMCI performed worse than CN on the RAVLT (Total Learning, p .0001; Trial 6, p .0001; Delayed Recall, p .0001; Verbal Forgetting, p .01). At 1-year follow-up, CN showed a learning effect, with Total Learning improving from a mean of 50 words at baseline to 55 words, and Delayed Recall from 11 to 12 words. MCI did not show a learning effect. In contrast, rMCI showed a pronounced learning effect that separated them from MCI at 1-year follow-up. Total Learning improved from 35 words at baseline to 43 words (1-year follow-up MCI v. rMCI, p .01); Trial 6 from 6 to 7.5 words (1-year follow-up MCI v. rMCI, p .01); Delayed Recall from 6.3 to 7.5 words (1-year follow-up MCI v. rMCI, p .01). Conclusions: MCI subjects do not benefit from repeated exposure to the RAVLT while rMCI subjects do. Use of learning strategies on the RAVLT may be an important marker for reliably differentiating MCI from rMCI.