Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:17:48.488Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of Neuropsychological Assessment by Videoconference and Face to Face

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2021

Richard Gnassounou ,
Bénédicte Defontaines ,
Séverine Denolle ,
Stéphanie Brun ,
Raphaël Germain ,
Déborah Schwartz ,
Stéphane Schück ,
Agnès Michon ,
Catherine Belin  and
Didier Maillet Open the ORCID record for Didier Maillet [Opens in a new window]
Richard Gnassounou
Affiliation:
Association Réseau Mémoire Aloïs, 75 rue de Lourmel, Paris, France
Bénédicte Defontaines
Affiliation:
Association Réseau Mémoire Aloïs, 75 rue de Lourmel, Paris, France
Séverine Denolle
Affiliation:
Association Réseau Mémoire Aloïs, 75 rue de Lourmel, Paris, France
Stéphanie Brun
Affiliation:
Association Réseau Mémoire Aloïs, 75 rue de Lourmel, Paris, France
Raphaël Germain
Affiliation:
Kappa Santé, 4 rue de Cléry, Paris, France
Déborah Schwartz
Affiliation:
Kappa Santé, 4 rue de Cléry, Paris, France
Stéphane Schück
Affiliation:
Kappa Santé, 4 rue de Cléry, Paris, France
Agnès Michon
Affiliation:
Département des Maladies du Système Nerveux, Institut de la mémoire et de la maladie d’Alzheimer (IM2A), Hôpital de la Pitié-Salpêtrière, AP-HP, Paris, France
Catherine Belin
Affiliation:
Service de Neurologie, Hôpital Saint Louis, AP-HP, 1 avenue Claude Vellefaux, Paris, France
Didier Maillet*
Affiliation:
Service de Neurologie, Hôpital Saint Louis, AP-HP, 1 avenue Claude Vellefaux, Paris, France Université de. Lille, ULR 4072 – PSITEC – Psychologie: Interactions, Temps, Emotions, Cognition, Lille, France
*
*Correspondence and reprint requests to: Didier Maillet, Service de Neurologie, Hôpital Saint Louis, 1 avenue Claude Vellefaux, ParisF-75010, France. Email: didier.maillet@aphp.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To compare the administration of neuropsychological tests by teleneuropsychology (TeleNP) and face to face (F-F) in order to determine the feasibility and reliability of TeleNP.

Method:

At the inclusion visit, all participants underwent a traditional F-F neuropsychological assessment as part of their standard care. Four months after inclusion, they were randomized to undergo an additional neuropsychological assessment either by F-F administration or by TeleNP.

Results:

A total of 150 adults with cognitive complaints, but with no major cognitive or sensorial impairment were included. At 4 months, 69 participants were randomized in the F-F arm and 71 in TeleNP arm (10 lost in the follow-up). The overall satisfaction was high: 87.1% in the TeleNP arm were “very satisfied”, and 82.9% indicated no preference between F-F and TeleNP. In agreement with previous data from the literature, neuropsychological assessments gave similar results across both administration conditions for a large majority of tests [Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (FCSRT) French version, Mahieux gestural praxis battery, Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB), time of completion of the Trail making Test (TMT) A and B, number of errors of the TMT B, Rey complex figure test, categorical et phonological verbal fluency tests] and minor differences for others [80-picture naming test (DO-80), FAB, Digit Span forward and backward and number of errors in the TMT A].

Conclusions:

TeleNP is a promising method to be able to test patients as an alternative to F-F condition. Before this procedure can be generalized, it is now necessary to standardize the adaptation of certain tests and to test them in populations with more significant cognitive disorders.

Keywords

Cognitive assessmentDementiaAlzheimer’s diseaseNeuropsychological testsTeleneuropsychologyVideoconference
Type
Regular Research
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 28 , Issue 5 , May 2022 , pp. 483 - 493
Copyright
Copyright © INS. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adjorlolo, S. (2015). Can teleneuropsychology help meet the neuropsychological needs of Western Africans? The case of Ghana. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 22, 388–398.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. (2000). On the Adaptive Control of the False Discovery Rate in MultipleTesting with Independent Statistics. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 25, 60–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brearly, T.W., Shura, R.D., Martindale, S.L., Lazowski, R.A., Luxton, D.D., Shenal, B.V., & Rowland, J.A. (2017). Neuropsychological Test Administration by Videoconference: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Neuropsychology Review, 27, 174–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castanho, T.C., Amorim, L., Moreira, P.S., Mariz, J., Palha, J.A., Sousa, N., & Santos, N.C. (2016). Assessing Cognitive Function in Older Adults Using a Videoconference Approach. EBioMedicine, 11, 278–284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chodosh, J., Petitti, D.B., Elliott, M., Hays, R.D., Crooks, V.C., Reuben, D.B., & Wenger, N. (2004). Physician recognition of cognitive impairment: Evaluating the need for improvement: Recognizing cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 52, 1051–1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cullum, C.M., Weiner, M.F., Gehrmann, H.R., & Hynan, L.S. (2006). Feasibility of Telecognitive Assessment in Dementia. Assessment, 13, 385–390.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cullum, C.M. & Grosch, M.G. (2012).Teleneuropsychology. In Myers, K.. and Turvey, C. (Eds.), Telemental Health: Clinical, Technical, and Administrative Foundations for Evidence-Based Practice (pp. 275–294). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Cullum, C.M., Hynan, L.S., Grosch, M., Parikh, M., &Weiner, M.F. (2014). Teleneuropsychology: evidence for video teleconference-based neuropsychological assessment. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 20, 1028–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deloche, G., & Hannequin, D. (1997). Test de dénomination orale d’images : DO 80. Paris: Les Éditions du Centre de Psychologie Appliquée (ECPA).Google Scholar
Dubois, B., Slachevsky, A., Litvan, I., & Pillon, B. (2000). A frontal assessment battery at bedside. Neurology, 55, 1621–1626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galusha-Glasscock, J.M., Horton, D.K., Weiner, M.F., &Cullum, C.M. (2016). Video Teleconference Administration of the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status. Archive of Clinical Neuropsychology, 31, 8–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Godefroy, O., Azouvi, P., Robert, P., Roussel, M., Le Gall, D., Meulemans, T., & the Groupe de Réflexion sur l’Evaluation des Fonctions Exécutives Study Group. (2010). Dysexecutive syndrome: Diagnostic criteria and validation study. Annals of Neurology, 68, 855–864.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grosch, M.C., Weiner, M.F., Hynan, L.S., Shore, J., & Cullum, C.M. (2015). Video Teleconference-based neurocognitive screening in geropsychiatry. Psychiatry Research, 225, 734–735.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrell, K.M., Wilkins, S.S., Connor, M.K., & Chodosh, J. (2014). Telemedicine and the evaluation of cognitive impairment: The additive value of neuropsychological assessment. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 15, 600–606.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hildebrand, R., Chow, H., Williams, C., Nelson, M., & Wass, P. (2004). Feasibility of neuropsychological testing of older adults via videoconference: Implications for assessing the capacity for independent living. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 10, 130–134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
INSEE. (2014). Statistiques de l’état civil et estimations de population. Retrieved October 16, 2016 from www.insee.fr Google Scholar
Jacobsen, S.E., Sprenger, T., Andersson, S., & Krogstad, J.M. (2003). Neuropsychological Assessment and Telemedicine: A Preliminary Study Examining the Reliability of Neuropsychology Services Performed via Telecommunication. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 9, 472–478.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joint Task Force for the Development of Telepsychology Guidelines for Psychologists (2013). Guidelines for the practice of telepsychology. American Psychologist, 68, 791–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jollivet, M., Fortier, J., Besnard, J., Le Gall, D., & Allain, P. (2018). Neuropsychologie et technologies numériques. Revue de Neuropsychologie, 10, 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landis, J.R. & Koch, G.G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mahieux-Laurent, F., Fabre, C., Galbrun, E., Dubrulle, A., Moroni, C., & the members of the Groupe de Réflexion sur les Praxies du CMRR Ile-de-France Sud (2009). Validation of a brief screening scale evaluating praxic abilities for use in memory clinics. Evaluation in 419 controls, 127 mild cognitive impairment and 320 demented patients. Revue de Neurologie, 165, 560–567.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyers, J.E. & Meyers, K.R. (1995). Rey Complex Figure Test and Recognition Trial: Professional Manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resource.Google Scholar
Munro Cullum, C., Hynan, L.S., Grosch, M., Parikh, M., & Weiner, M.F. (2014). Teleneuropsychology: Evidence for Video Teleconference-Based Neuropsychological Assessment. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 20, 1028–1033.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parikh, M., Grosch, M.C., Graham, L.L., Hynan, L.S., Weiner, M., Shore, J.H., & Cullum, C.M. (2013). Consumer acceptability of brief videoconference-based neuropsychological assessment in older individuals with and without cognitive impairment. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 27, 808–817.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spielberger, C.D., Gorsuch, R.L., Lushene, R., Vagg, P.R., & Jacobs, G.A. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
Temple, V., Drummond, C., Valiquette, S., & Jozsvai, E. (2010). A comparison of intellectual assessments over video conferencing and in-person for individuals with ID: Preliminary data: Intellectual assessment over video conferencing. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54, 573–577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turkstra, L.S., Quinn-Padron, M., Johnson, J.E., Workinger, M.S., & Antoniotti, N. (2012). In-Person Versus Telehealth Assessment of Discourse Ability in Adults With Traumatic Brain Injury. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 27, 424–432.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van der Linden, M., Coyette, F., Poitrenaud, J., Kalafat, M., Calacis, F., Wyns, C., & the members of the GREMEM (2004). L’épreuve de rappel libre/rappel indicé à 16 items (RL/RI-16). In Van der Linden, M., Adam Agniel, S., & the members of the GREMEM (Eds.), L’évaluation des troubles de la mémoire: présentation de quatre tests de mémoire épisodique (avec leur étalonnage) (pp. 25–47). Marseille: Solal.Google Scholar
Vestal, L., Smith-Olinde, L., Hicks, G., Hutton, T., & Hart, J. (2006). Efficacy of language assessment in Alzheimer’s disease: comparing in-person examination and telemedicine. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 1, 467–471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wadsworth, H.E., Galusha-Glasscock, J.M., Womack, K.B., Quiceno, M., Weiner, M.F., Hynan, L.S., & Cullum, C.M. (2016). Remote neuropsychological assessment in rural American Indians with and without cognitive impairment. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 31, 420–425.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wadsworth, H.E., Dhima, K., Womack, K.B, Hart, J., Weiner, M.F., Hynan, L.S., & Cullum, C.M. (2018). Validity of teleneuropsychological assessment in older patients with cognitive disorders. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 33, 1040–1045.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III: Scoring and Administration Manual. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar