There have been no data on the performance of the Initiation-Perseveration subtest of the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (MDRS-IP) in screening poststroke dementia (PSDE). Three months after the index stroke, a research assistant administered the MDRS-IP and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) to 83 Chinese stroke patients with lacunar infarcts who were consecutively admitted to the stroke unit of a general hospital. A psychiatrist, who was blind to the MDRS-IP and MMSE scores, interviewed all 83 patients and made a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edition) diagnosis of dementia, which served as the benchmark for judging the performance of MDRSIP. The optimal cutoff point of MDRS-IP was 22/23. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of MDRS-IP, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were 82%, 90%, 0.41, 0.98, and 0.91, respectively. The overall performance of the MDRS-IP was comparable to the MMSE. (J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 2005;18:3-7)
Mattis S. Mini-Mental Status Examination for organic mental syndrome in the elderly patients. In: Bellack L, Karasu TB, eds. Geriatric Psychiatry: A Handbook for Psychiatrists and Primary Care Physicians. New York, NY: Grune & Stratton; 1976:77-121.
2.
Woodard JL, Salthouse TA, Godsall RE, Green RC. Confirmatory factor analysis of the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Psychol Assess. 1996;8:85-91.
3.
Hofer SM, Piccinin AM, Hershey D. Analysis of structure and discriminative power of the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale. J Clin Psychol. 1996;52:395-409.
4.
Lucas JA, Ivnik RJ, Smith GE, et al.Normative data for the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1998;20:536-547.
5.
Vangel SJ Jr, Lichtenberg PA. Mattis Dementia Rating Scale: clinical utility and relationship with demographic variables. Clin Neuropsychol. 1995;9:209-213.
6.
Monsch AU, Bondi MW, Salmon DP, et al.Clinical validity of the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale in detecting dementia of the Alzheimer type: a double cross-validation and application to a community-dwelling sample. Arch Neurol. 1995;52:899-904.
7.
Van Gorp WG, Marcotte TD, Sultzer D, et al.Screening for dementia: comparison of three commonly used instruments. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1999;21:29-38.
8.
Marcopulos BA, Gripshover DL, Broshek DK, et al.Neuropsychological assessment of psychogeriatric patients with limited education. Clin Neuropsychol. 1999;13:147-156.
9.
Salmon DP, Thomas RG, Pay MM, et al.Alzheimer’s disease can be accurately diagnosed in very mildly impaired individuals. Neurology. 2002;59:1022-1028.
10.
Chiu HFK, Lee HC, Chung WS, Kwong PK. Reliability and validity of the Cantonese version of Mini-Mental State Examination: a preliminary study. Hong Kong J Psychiatry. 1994; 4:25-28.
11.
Chan AS, Choi A, Chiu H, Lam L. Clinical validity of the Chinese version of Mattis Dementia Rating Scale in differentiating dementia of Alzheimer’s type in Hong Kong. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2003;9:45-55.
12.
Mohr E, Walker D, Randolph C, et al.Utility of clinical trial batteries in the measurement of Alzheimer’s and Huntington’s dementia. Int Psychogeriatr. 1996;8:397-411.
13.
Suarez SV, Stankoff B, Conquy L, et al.Similar subcortical pattern of cognitive impairment in AIDS patients with and without dementia. Eur J Neurol. 2000;7:151-158.
14.
Marson DC, Dymek MP, Duke LW, Harrel LE. Subscale validity of the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 1997;12:269-275.
15.
Vitaliano PP, Breen AR, Russo J, et al.The clinical utility of the dementia rating scale for assessing Alzheimer patients. J Chronic Dis. 1984;37:743-753.
16.
Kramer JH, Reed BR, Mungas D, et al.Executive dysfunction in subcortical ischaemic vascular disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002;72:217-220.
17.
Paul RH, Cohen RA, Moser D, et al.Performance on the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale in patients with vascular dementia: relationships to neuroimaging findings. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 2001;14:33-36.
18.
van Swieten JC, Koudstaal PJ, Visser MC, et al.Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke. 1988;19:604-607.
19.
Brott T, Adams HP Jr, Olinger CP, et al.Measurement of acute cerebral infarctions: a clinical examination scale. Stroke. 1989;20:864-870.
20.
Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. Md State Med J. 1965;14:61-65.
21.
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed.Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1994.
22.
Morris JC. The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology. 1993;43:2412-2414.
23.
DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristics curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44:837-845.
24.
Lamar M, Podell K, Carew TG, et al.Perseverative behavior in Alzheimer’s disease and subcortical ischemic vascular dementia. Neuropsychology. 1997;11:523-534.
25.
Lafosse JM, Reed BR, Mungas D, et al.Fluency and memory differences between ischemic vascular dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Neuropsychology. 1997;11:514-522.
26.
Kertesz A. Clydesdale S. Neuropsychological deficits in vascular dementia vs Alzheimer’s disease: frontal lobe deficits prominent in vascular dementia. Arch Neurol. 1994;51:1226-1231.
27.
Freidl W, Schmidt R, Stronegger WJ, et al.Sociodemographic predictors and concurrent validity of the Mini-Mental State Examination and the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale. Eur Arch Psychiat Clin Neurosci. 1996;246:317-319.
28.
Erkinjuntti T, Inzitari D, Pantoni L, et al.Research criteria for subcortical vascular dementia in clinical trials. J Neural Transm. 2000;59(suppl):23-30.
