The Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test (MoCA) as a screening tool for cognitive dysfunction in fibromyalgia

15Citations
Citations of this article
30Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective Cognitive dysfunction is one of the criteria for the diagnosis of fibromyalgia (FM) and is typically based on self-report questionnaires such as the Symptom Severity Scale. However, recent studies have shown that there is no correlation between these subjective measures of cognitive dysfunction and more lengthy objective measures of cognitive functioning. This points to the need for a briefer valid evaluation tool for cognitive dysfunction in FM. The aim of this study is to examine whether the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test is a valid measure of cognitive assessment in FM patients, by comparing it to a comprehensive computerised cognitive assessment battery. Method Sixty-two FM patients (55 women, 7 men, mean age = 46.17 years, sd=12.56) were administered the MoCA and a computerised cognitive assessment battery. FM symptoms were assessed on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), the Widespread Pain Index (WPI), the Symptom Severity Scale (SSS), and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-2). Patient effort was controlled on the TOMM (Test of Memory Malingering). Results Moderate positive correlations were found between the MoCA and the computerised cognitive scores as follows: Global Cognitive Score (r=0.493**, p=0.00), Memory Index Score (r= 0.384**, p=0.002), Executive Function Index Score (r=0.461**, p=0.00), Attention Index Score (r=0.310*, p=0.016), Information Processing Speed Index Score (r=0.435**, p=0.001), and Motor Skills (r=0.406**, p=0.002). Conclusion The MoCA is an acceptable cognitive screening test for the cognitive evaluation of FM patients.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Elkana, O., Nimni, Y., Ablin, J. N., Shorer, R., & Aloush, V. (2022). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test (MoCA) as a screening tool for cognitive dysfunction in fibromyalgia. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, 40(6), 1136–1142. https://doi.org/10.55563/clinexprheumatol/3yxu6p

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free