Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Protocol for the development of versions of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for people with hearing or vision impairment
  1. Piers Dawes1,
  2. Annie Pye2,
  3. David Reeves3,
  4. Wai Kent Yeung4,
  5. Saima Sheikh4,
  6. Chyrssoula Thodi5,
  7. Anna Pavlina Charalambous5,
  8. Kathleen Gallant6,
  9. Ziad Nasreddine6,
  10. Iracema Leroi7
  1. 1 Manchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, University of Manchester, Manhcester, UK
  2. 2 Institute of Brain, Behavior and Mental Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  3. 3 Institute of Population Health, Centre for Biostatistics, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  4. 4 Division of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  5. 5 Department of Health Sciences, European University Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
  6. 6 MoCA Clinic & Institute, Quebec, Canada
  7. 7 Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Institute of Brain, Behaviour, and Mental Health, Manchester, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Piers Dawes; piers.dawes{at}manchester.ac.uk

Abstract

Introduction Hearing and vision impairments are highly prevalent among older adults and impact commonly used cognitive assessment tools for the identification of dementia. Adaptations of such tests for people with hearing or vision impairment have not been adequately validated among populations with such sensory impairment.

Methods and analysis We will develop two versions of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for people with acquired hearing impairment (MoCA-H) or vision impairment (MoCA-V). The MoCA-H and MoCA-V will exclude the existing MoCA items that are presented in spoken or visual format, respectively, and include new suitably adapted items. Participants (n=792) with combinations of hearing, vision and cognitive impairment will complete standard or adapted versions of the MoCA across three language sites (English, French and Greek). Development of the MoCA-H and the MoCA-V will be based on analysis of adapted and standard MoCA items following model-based development to select the combination of items for the MoCA-H and MoCA-V that provide optimal sensitivity and specificity for detection of dementia.

Ethics and dissemination The study has received ethical approval from respective centres in the UK, France, Greece and Cyprus. The results of the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication, conference presentations, the study website (https://www.sense-cog.eu/), the SENSE-Cog Twitter account (@sense_cog) and the MoCA test website (https://www.mocatest.org/). The main outputs of the study will be versions of the MoCA that are appropriate for use with adults with acquired hearing or vision impairment and will contribute significantly to the clinical care of older people.

  • dementia
  • old age psychiatry
  • otolaryngology
  • ophthalmology

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors IL and PD are responsible for the overall development of an ethically sound protocol. PD, KG, AP, SS, CT, APC, WKY and ZN developed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment - Hearing impaired version (MoCA-H) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment - Vision impaired version (MoCA-V). PD, AP and DR designed the validation study, and DR planned the analyses. All authors contributed to the drafting, critical revision and final approval of the document. Thank you to the patient panels who provided advice on the design and conduct of this research.

  • Funding This work was supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement number 668648. PD is supported in part by the National Institute for Health Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethics approval This study has been reviewed by local ethics committees in the UK, Cyprus, France and Greece. Ethical approvals were granted by the Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (UK) on 13 September 2017, by the Cyprus National Bioethics Committee on 19 January 2017, by the Comité de Protection des Personnes du Sud-Ouest et Outre-Mer IV on 25 May 2018 and by the Local Ethical Committee of Health Sciences and Scientific Committee of the Eginition Hospital of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens on 15 December 2017.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.