HomeLarge Type Edition
HOME ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Download to citation manager
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 63:855-859 (2008)
© 2008 The Gerontological Society of America

Self-Reported Distress After Cognitive Testing in Patients With Alzheimer's Disease

James M. Lai, Keith A. Hawkins, Cary P. Gross and Jason H. Karlawish

1 Section of Geriatric Medicine, 2 Department of Psychiatry, and 3 Section of General Internal Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
4 Division of Geriatrics, Leonard Davis Institute of ealth Economics, Center for Bioethics, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Alzheimer's Disease Center, and Institute on Aging, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Address correspondence to Jason Karlawish, MD, University of Pennsylvania Institute on Aging, 3615 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19104. E-mail: Jason.Karlawish{at}uphs.upenn.edu


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Background. The prevalence and degree of self-reported distress that patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) experience after cognitive testing remain unknown. It is also unknown whether this level of distress is at all related to specific patient factors, test performance, or awareness of test performance.

Methods. In 154 mild-to-moderate AD patients and 62 cognitively intact patients, we measured self-reported distress, on a five-point Likert scale, after 45 minutes of cognitive testing. Using multivariate logistic regression, we then examined whether demographic factors, level of education, depressive symptoms, cognitive performance, perceived test difficulty, and perceived test performance compared to 10 years ago were predictive of self-reported distress.

Results. The prevalence of any self-reported distress in patients with AD was 70% compared to 47% in patients without AD (p <.001). Of persons with AD, bivariate analyses revealed that those who reported more difficulty with testing (relative risk [RR] 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25–1.37) and felt that they performed worse than 10 years ago (RR 1.21; 95% CI, 1.07–1.30) were at increased risk for reporting more distress. Paradoxically, cognitive performance was a weak predictor of distress, with only language performance demonstrating an association (RR 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89–0.99). Adjustments for demographic factors, education, dementia severity, or depressive symptoms in the multivariable analyses did not alter these relationships.

Conclusion. Cognitive tasks provoke more distress in patients with mild-to-moderate AD compared with persons who do not have dementia. Predictors of distress are more closely related to patient awareness about test difficulty and performance, rather than actual test performance.

Key Words: Alzheimer's disease • Neuropsychiatric testing • Dementia • Distress


COGNITIVE testing is essential to Alzheimer's disease (AD) research and care. It provides clinicians and clinical investigators with a measure of a patient's cognitive function that they can use together with clinical data to diagnose and follow the progression of AD (1–3) and to assess the efficacy of an intervention to prevent or treat AD in clinical trials (4).

As valuable as cognitive testing is for diagnosis, treatment, and staging, clinical experience suggests that such cognitive tasks may also negatively impact a patient's psychological state, especially among patients who are aware of their cognitive impairments. Although patients with dementia often lose awareness of their cognitive deficits (5), the severity of loss of awareness spans a spectrum and does not have a clear association with the severity of cognitive deficits (6).

Few empiric studies describe the relationship between cognitive testing and distress in the patients who undergo it (7). By quantifying this association and defining the demographic and disease factors that predict this distress, clinicians may generate valuable information that could alter the management of patients with AD in at least two ways. First, patients who experience distress when exposed to a standardized cognitive challenge also may be at greater risk for experiencing high levels of distress when performing more ecologically valid cognitive tasks, such as managing one's finances or preparing a meal. Second, clinicians who identify factors that predict distress after cognitive testing can anticipate this symptom and develop ways to mitigate its impact.

This study represents the first step in a line of investigation designed to determine the clinical value of measuring the psychological responses patients have to cognitive tasks. We examined the prevalence and severity of self-reported distress after a cognitive test battery in patients with and without AD. Furthermore, we determined patient characteristics associated with this distress, and tested whether actual test performance or patient perceptions of test performance are related to the degree of distress that patients report.


    METHODS
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Participants
Data for this study were gathered from participants enrolled in the cohort of the PENN Memory Center of the Alzheimer's Disease Center at the University of Pennsylvania. All 154 patients with AD met the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke–Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association (NINCDS–ADRDA) criteria for probable or possible AD and had mild to moderate-stage disease based on a Folstein Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; 8) score between 12 and 30. All 62 cognitively intact persons did not meet criteria for the diagnosis of dementia or mild cognitive impairment following a clinical history, exam and cognitive testing. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, or their proxies when necessary. The University of Pennsylvania Institutional Review Board approved the cohort study.

Data Collection
As part of routine annual assessments, a trained research assistant administered a cognitive test battery to participants. The battery takes 45 minutes to complete and consists of the following measures: Verbal Fluency Test (9), Boston Naming Test (10), Folstein MMSE, Word List Memory Task (11), Delayed Word List Recall (11), Word List Recognition (11), Logical Memory 1 (12), Clock Drawing Task (13), Digit Symbol Test (14), and Logical Memory 2 (12). Clinicians collected data on age, race, ethnicity, and years of education, and assessed self-reported depressive symptoms using the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) (15). Knowledgeable informants for the participants with AD also completed the Dementia Severity Rating Scale (DSRS) (16).

Self-Reported Measures
Immediately following the cognitive test battery, a research assistant asked the participants, "What was it like answering these questions? Would you say... not at all distressing, mildly distressing, moderately distressing, very distressing, or extremely distressing?" To assess for perceptions of test difficulty, participants were also asked, "What was it like answering these questions? Would you say... very easy, easy, somewhat easy, somewhat difficult, difficult, or very difficult?" To assess the participants' level of awareness in their test performance, they were asked, "How is your ability to do these tests compared to ten years ago? Better than ten years ago, the same as ten years ago, or worse than ten years ago?" Although this measure does not fully capture a patient's insight, it is a measure that is clinically plausible as dementia is, by definition, a change in cognitive performance from a person's baseline abilities.

Statistical Analysis
Because patients rarely reported having extreme distress, we collapsed the "very" and "extremely" distressing categories into a single "severe" category. All subsequent analyses evaluated the degree of self-reported distress using this ordinal four-category scale. For similar reasons, we collapsed patients' perceptions of test difficulty into two categories: "very to somewhat easy" and "very to somewhat difficult." To enhance the clinical interpretation of patient perceptions of historical test performance, we combined the categories of patients who reported having the "same" or "better" test performance compared to 10 years ago. For patients with AD, we operationalized that reporting test performance that was "worse than ten years ago" signified adequate insight with respect to their cognitive abilities. Meanwhile, responses of "same" or "better" test performance signified impaired insight, as persons with AD, by definition, have a clinically significant decline in their cognitive performance.

The neuropsychological tests were separated into four cognitive domains: language (Boston Naming, Verbal Fluency), memory (Word List Memory, Word List Recall, Word List Recognition, Logical Memory 1 and 2), processing speed (Digit Symbol Substitution), and visual-spatial ability (Clock Drawing). Raw scores for the tests in each domain were converted into z scores and summed to form four composite variables. A composite variable, representing the sum of all test z scores, was also created to provide a measure of overall test performance in patients with AD (17).

For comparisons between AD and intact patients, we used the chi-square statistic for categorical data, an unpooled Student t test for normally distributed data, and the Wilcoxon rank sum test for variables with non-normal distributions as determined by the Shapiro–Wilk test. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were assessed using ordinal logistic regression (18). All odds ratios were converted to relative risk (RR) estimates, as the presence of self-reported distress was common (>10%) (19).

Using a manual stepwise procedure, we performed two sets of multivariable analyses. First, we examined the relationship between perceptions of test difficulty and test performance on self-reported distress given the potential confounding factors of age, gender, race, education, dementia severity, actual test performance, and GDS score. Second, we evaluated the relationship between test performance in each of the specific cognitive domains and self-reported distress. In these models, domain performance was controlled for age, gender, race, education, dementia severity, and GDS score. Variables included in the final models were either statistically significant at the p <.05 level or were associated with a >10% change in the parameter estimate of the independent variable or variables of interest. All analyses were performed using SAS (version 9.1; SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC).


    RESULTS
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Table 1 compares the demographics, cognitive test performance, perceptions of cognitive performance and test difficulty, and the degrees of distress reported after testing between patients with AD and cognitively intact older adults. As expected, patients with AD had an average MMSE score that was lower than the mean score of the cognitively intact group. Similarly, the AD patients had significantly lower performance on all other measures of cognitive ability (p <.001). They also tended to be older (p =.002) and to have fewer years of education (p =.002) than the intact group. Both groups had a similar gender (>63% female), racial (>65% white), and ethnic mix (>84% non-Latino), and both groups were well educated, having an average of at least 12 years of education. Although the patients with AD reported more depressive symptoms (p <.001) than the cognitively intact group with significantly higher scores on the GDS, the medians for both the AD and intact groups were low (1 and 0, respectively).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 1. Demographic Characteristics and Prevalence of Distress for Patients With and Without Alzheimer's Dementia.

 
Prevalence and Severity of Self-Reported Distress
Nearly three quarters (70%, n = 108/154) of the patients with AD reported distress following cognitive testing. The majority of patients (53%) categorized their distress as mild to moderate severity, and a much smaller percentage (17%) found the experience to be very or extremely distressing. Only 47% of the cognitively intact patients reported experiencing distress after testing (p <.001). The severity of their distress was also significantly lower with fewer percentages of patients reporting moderate and severe degrees of distress (16% vs 23% and 2% vs 17%, respectively; p =.002).

Predictors of Distress in Patients with AD
In the bivariate analyses (Table 2), patients with AD who perceived the testing to be more difficult had a significantly greater risk of reporting more distress (RR 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25–1.37) than did those who did not find testing difficult. AD patients who felt that they performed worse than 10 years ago (RR 1.21; 95% CI, 1.07–1.30) also had an increased risk of reporting more distress than those who felt that they did the same or better than 10 years ago. Patients who admitted having "more problems with memory than most" on the GDS, however, did not have a greater risk of reporting more distress (RR 1.12; 95% CI,.95–1.24). Of the four cognitive domains shown in Table 3, we observed a small but statistically significant bivariate association between decreased language ability and self-reported distress (RR 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89–0.99). There was no association between distress and performance on the MMSE. Within the cognitively intact group, however, there were no significant bivariate associations between demographic factors, cognitive test performance, perceptions of test difficulty or test performance, and increasing levels of reported distress.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 2. Relative Risk (RR) of Reporting Distress After Cognitive Testing in Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer's Disease for Demographic and Disease Factors.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 3. Relative Risk (RR) of Reporting Distress After Cognitive Testing in Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer's Disease Based on Cognitive Test Performance.

 
In the multivariate analyses, patients with AD were significantly more likely than those without AD to report distress, after adjusting for age, education, and GDS scores (RR 1.26; 95% CI, 1.14–1.33). Among patients with AD (Table 2), those who perceived the tests to be more difficult (RR 1.32; 95% CI, 1.22–1.38) and believed that they performed worse than 10 years ago (RR 1.25; 95% CI, 1.08–1.34) had an increased risk of reporting more distress after adjusting for age, education, race, cognitive test performance, and GDS scores. The multivariate analysis also revealed that patients who were white were also at increased risk of reporting greater levels of distress than were non-white patients with AD (RR 1.29; 95% CI, 1.06–1.38). Introducing MMSE into these models did not modify the associations. Finally, despite adjustment for potential confounders, the language domain remained the only measure of actual test performance that was a significant predictor of distress (Table 3).


    DISCUSSION
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Among patients with mild-to-moderate AD, self-reported distress following cognitive testing is common. We found some form of distress in 70% of patients in our sample. Distress, however, is also common among persons who are cognitively intact. Nearly half (47%) of our nondemented comparison group reported it. However, it was significantly lower in prevalence and in severity than that found among persons with AD. Although there were no predictors of self-reported distress in the cognitively intact group, patients with AD had several. Namely, those who were white, had lower performance on tests of language ability, were more aware of their cognitive declines, and perceived the tests to be more difficult, all had a greater risk of reporting distress.

These findings have two clinical implications. First, neuropsychological testing is not necessarily a benign exercise, but may have short-term psychological effects. These effects may generate anxiety and potentially influence patients' compliance with follow-up, as is observed with patients who experience distress following testing for other diseases (20). Knowledge of this distress, however, provides clinicians with the opportunity to prepare patients and family members for the risks associated with testing and to institute interventions after testing to minimize its negative effects. Furthermore, if clinicians assess the risk factors for distress, they may be able to categorize their patients into those who are at risk for distress. Specifically, persons who endorse cognitive decline and find cognitive testing difficult versus those who do not endorse these features are likely to experience excessive levels of distress from cognitive testing.

Second, patients with AD who experience distress during testing may also experience similar distress while performing other functionally relevant tasks, such as balancing a checkbook or following a recipe. These tasks simulate the same kind of cognitive challenges experienced in neuropsychological testing. Therefore, self-reported distress during testing may serve as a marker for those patients with AD who may have a more chronic exposure to distress. Further research is necessary to show whether this is in fact the case. The absence of data on the outcomes associated with symptoms of distress in patients with AD represents a clinically relevant area of future research.

Regarding risk factors for distress, insight into cognitive problems emerged as a predictor. At least 60% of the patients with AD reported that they performed "worse" on the testing compared to 10 years ago. Given that insight has also been associated with a greater likelihood of being capable of giving consent for an AD treatment (21), our results suggest that one may derive both scientific and clinical value from assessing patient insight.

Paradoxically, cognitive test performance was minimally associated with experiencing distress. Only performance in language ability was associated with distress. Furthermore, our informant-based measure of dementia severity, the DSRS, also failed to show an association with self-reported distress. This finding suggests that the presence of distress may not necessarily be linked to the severity of either functional or cognitive impairments. One potential explanation for this is that the patients with AD who perceived greater test difficulty and had greater insight into their deficits had small declines in cognitive ability for the tests used in this study. Tests of other cognitive domains or with a higher sensitivity for detecting change may have revealed a stronger association between insight and distress and actual performance and distress.

Although there was a surprisingly modest relationship between actual cognitive performance and self-reported distress, our findings remain consistent with existing hypotheses linking exposure to stress with hippocampal (22,23) and prefrontal cortex (24) dysfunction. Namely, we observed an association between language ability, a cognitive function associated with the prefrontal cortex (25), and distress. We did not, however, demonstrate a relationship between performance on memory domain tests and self-reported distress. Differences in the types of tests used to measure episodic and declarative memory in previous studies may, in part, explain the absence of this observation. Additionally, given the high distribution of scores in the lower ranges for the tests of Logical Memory 1 and 2 and Word List Recall (Table 1), floor effects may have limited our ability to measure a range of memory function.

The absence of baseline measurements of self-reported distress taken prior to the cognitive testing is also a study limitation. It remains unknown how closely perceptions of distress after testing differ from those present before testing. Lastly, we recognize that our findings represent data collected from a single site. Patient populations with different characteristics and alternate clinical settings may respond differently to cognitive testing.

Overall, these results show that cognitive tasks provoke more distress in patients with mild-to-moderate AD compared with persons who do not have dementia, and that this distress is more closely related to patient awareness about test difficulty and performance than actual test performance or dementia severity. Consequently, clinicians should consider the value of monitoring patients' insight into their cognitive ability, as well as test performance, to help gauge the psychological effects of the disease. Future studies are needed to clarify the prognostic significance of distress related to testing and to determine appropriate interventions, if any, which may benefit these patients.


    Acknowledgments
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
This research was supported through Marion S. Ware Alzheimer's Disease Drug Discovery Program (to JHK), the Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program, the National Institute on Aging (grant P30-AG10124 to JHK and T32AG1934 to JML), the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (to JML), the Alzheimer's Association (IIRG-05-14532 to KAH), a Paul Beeson Award (1 K08 AG24842 to CPG), the Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center at Yale (P30AG21342 to CPG), and a Greenwall Faculty Scholar in Bioethics Award (to JHK).


    Footnotes
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Decision Editor: Darryl Wieland, PhD, MPH

Received May 29, 2007

Accepted December 29, 2007


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Connor DJ, Salmon DP, Sandy TJ, Galasko D, Hansen LA, Thal LJ. Cognitive profiles of autopsy-confirmed Lewy body variant vs pure Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol. 1998;55:994-1000.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Kraybill ML, Larson EB, Tsuang DW, et al. Cognitive differences in dementia patients with autopsy-verified AD, Lewy body pathology, or both. Neurology. 2005;64:2069-2073.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Morris JC, Edland S, Clark C, et al. The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD). Part IV. Rates of cognitive change in the longitudinal assessment of probable Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. 1993;43:2457-2465.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Leber P. Guidelines for the Clinical Evaluation of Antidementia Drugs. Rockville, MD: Food and Drug Administration: 1990.
  5. Sevush S, Leve N. Denial of memory deficit in Alzheimer's disease. Am J Psychiatry. 1993;150:748-751.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Vogel A, Stokholm J, Gade A, Andersen BB, Hejl AM, Waldemar G. Awareness of deficits in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease: do MCI patients have impaired insight? Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2004;17:181-187.[Medline]
  7. Tiberti C, Sabe L, Kuzis G, Garcia Cuerva A, Leiguarda R, Starkstein SE. Prevalence and correlates of the catastrophic reaction in Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. 1998;50:546-548.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. "Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12:189-198.[Medline]
  9. Isaacs B, Kennie AT. The Set test as an aid to the detection of dementia in old people. Br J Psychiatry. 1973;123:467-470.[Medline]
  10. Kaplan E, Goodglass H, Weintraub S. The Boston Naming Test. 2nd Ed. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1983.
  11. Atkinson RC, Shiffrin RM. The control of short-term memory. Sci Am. 1971;225:82-90.[Medline]
  12. Wechsler D. Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised Manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation; 1987.
  13. Morris JC, Heyman A, Mohs RC, et al. The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD). Part I. Clinical and neuropsychological assessment of Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. 1989;39:1159-1165.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Wechsler D. Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS). New York: The Psychological Corporation; 1955.
  15. Brink TL. Clinical Gerontology: A Guide to Assessment and Intervention. New York: Haworth Press; 1986: ix, 517.
  16. Clark CM, Ewbank DC. Performance of the dementia severity rating scale: a caregiver's questionnaire for rating severity in Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 1996;10:31-39.[Medline]
  17. Chandler MJ, Lacritz LH, Hynan LS, et al. A total score for the CERAD neuropsychological battery. Neurology. 2005;65:102-106.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Mccullagh P. Regression-models for ordinal data. J Roy Stat Soc B. 1980;42:109-142.
  19. Zhang J, Yu KF. What's the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes. JAMA. 1998;280:1690-1691.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Palmer BW, Dunn LB, Appelbaum PS, et al. Assessment of capacity to consent to research among older persons with schizophrenia, Alzheimer disease, or diabetes mellitus: comparison of a 3-item questionnaire with a comprehensive standardized capacity instrument. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62:726-733.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Karlawish JH, Casarett DJ, James BD, Xie SX, Kim SY. The ability of persons with Alzheimer's disease to make a decision about taking an AD treatment. Neurology. 2005;64:1514-1519.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Lupien SJ, Gaudreau S, Tchiteya BM, et al. Stress-induced declarative memory impairment in healthy elderly subjects: relationship to cortisol reactivity. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1997;82:2070-2075.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Wilson RS, Fleischman DA, Myers RA, et al. Premorbid proneness to distress and episodic memory impairment in Alzheimer's disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry, 2004;75:191-195.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Payne JD, Nadel L, Allen JJ, Thomas KG, Jacobs WJ. The effects of experimentally induced stress on false recognition. Memory. 2002;10:1-6.[Medline]
  25. Phelps EA, Hyder F, Blamire AM, Shulman RG. FMRI of the prefrontal cortex during overt verbal fluency. Neuroreport. 1997;8:561-565.[Medline]




This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Download to citation manager
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation


HOME ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS