Montreal Cognitive Assessment Hearing Impairment (MoCA-H) no Português Brasileiro: validade de critério e de construto
Montreal Cognitive Assessment Hearing Impairment (MoCA-H) in Brazilian Portuguese: criterion and construct validity
Gabriela Konrath; Rochele Martins Machado; Karina Carlesso Pagliarin; Fernanda Soares Aurélio Patatt
Resumo
Objetivo: Buscar evidências de validade de critério e de construto para o protocolo Montreal Cognitive Assessment Hearing Impairment (MoCA-H) no Português Brasileiro. Método: Participaram da amostra 70 idosos distribuídos em dois grupos: Grupo 1-50 sujeitos com perda auditiva e sem declínio cognitivo; Grupo 2-20 sujeitos com perda auditiva e com declínio cognitivo. A validade de critério foi obtida mediante comparação dos Grupos 1 e 2, considerando o escore geral e os oito domínios avaliados no MoCA-H. Os dados foram analisados com o teste U de Mann-Whitney e teste T de Student, respeitando as características dos dados coletados. Para verificação da validade de construto analisou-se a correlação entre os escores totais do Mini Exame do Estado Mental (MEEM) e do MoCA-H obtidos pelo Grupo 2. Para tanto, utilizou-se o Teste de Correlação de Spearman. Resultados: A análise da validade de critério mostrou diferença entre os grupos com e sem declínio nas habilidades nomeação, atenção, linguagem, abstração, memória e evocação tardia, além do escore total do MoCA-H, indicando desempenho significativamente superior nos sujeitos do Grupo 1. Na análise da validade de construto, foi observado correlação fraca e sem significância (Rho=0,384; p=0,095) entre os escores do MoCA-H e do MEEM. Conclusão: O protocolo MoCA-H apresentou boa validade de critério para esta população específica, tornando-se uma ferramenta confiável para a triagem de declínio cognitivo leve. No entanto, não apresentou validade de construto satisfatória, indicando a necessidade de mais estudos com o referido instrumento utilizando outro protocolo como referência.
Palavras-chave
Abstract
Purpose: To find evidence of criterion and construct validity for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Hearing Impairment (MoCA-H) protocol in Brazilian Portuguese. Methods: The sample consisted of 70 elderly people divided into two groups: Group 1-50 subjects with hearing loss and no cognitive decline; Group 2-20 subjects with hearing loss and cognitive decline. Criterion validity was obtained by comparing Group 1 and 2 considering the overall score and the eight domains assessed in the MoCA-H. The data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U-test and Student’s T-test, respecting the characteristics of the data collected. To verify construct validity, the correlation between the total scores of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the MoCA-H obtained by Group 2 was analyzed. Spearman’s Correlation Test was used for this purpose. Results: The analysis of criterion validity showed a difference between the groups with and without decline in naming, attention, language, abstraction, memory and delayed recall skills, as well as the MoCA-H total score, indicating significantly higher performance of Group 1. The construct validity correlation analysis was weak and non-significant (Rho=0.384; p=0.095) between the MoCA-H and MMSE scores. Conclusion: The MoCA-H protocol showed good criterion validity for this specific population, making it a reliable tool for screening mild cognitive decline. However, it did not show satisfactory construct validity, indicating the need for further studies with this instrument using another protocol as a reference
Keywords
References
- 1Rech RS, Baumgarten A, Santos CM, Bulgarelli AF, Goulart BN. Discriminação social em adultos com deficiência auditiva nos serviços de saúde brasileiro: resultados da Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde. Cien Saude Colet. 2023;28(1):123-30. http://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232023281.08322022en PMid:36629558.
 » http://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232023281.08322022en
- 2Benfica GES. A integridade da audição para um bom desempenho do equilíbrio do corpo na terceira idade [monografia]. Manaus: Universidade do Estado do Amazonas; 2020.
- 3Yue T, Chen Y, Zheng Q, Xu Z, Wang W, Ni G. Screening tools and assessment methods of cognitive decline associated with age-related hearing loss: a review. Front Aging Neurosci. 2021;13:677090. http://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2021.677090 PMid:34335227.
 » http://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2021.677090
- 4Brandão ER, Guimarães RDA, Soares MJG, Cavalcanti H. Revisão bibliométrica: estratégias de triagem auditiva de idosos. Rev CEFAC. 2023;25(2):e5822. http://doi.org/10.1590/1982-0216/20232525822s
 » http://doi.org/10.1590/1982-0216/20232525822s
- 5Fulton SE, Lister JJ, Bush AL, Edwards JD, Andel R. Mechanisms of the hearing-cognition relationship. Semin Hear. 2015;36(3):140-9. http://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1555117 PMid:27516714.
 » http://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1555117
- 6Bowl MR, Dawson SJ. Age-related hearing loss. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2019;9(8):a033217. http://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a033217 PMid:30291149.
 » http://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a033217
- 7Gurgel RK, Ward PD, Schwartz S, Norton MC, Foster NL, Tschanz JT. Relationship of hearing loss and dementia: a prospective, population-based study. Otol Neurotol. 2014;35(5):775-81. http://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000000313
 » http://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000000313
- 8Wei J, Hu Y, Zhang L, Hao Q, Yang R, Lu H, et al. Hearing impairment, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Extra. 2017;7(3):440-52. http://doi.org/10.1159/000485178 PMid:29430246.
 » http://doi.org/10.1159/000485178
- 9Jayakody DMP, Friedland PL, Martins RN, Sohrabi HR. Impact of aging on the auditory system and related cognitive functions: a narrative review. Front Neurosci. 2018;12:125. http://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00125 PMid:29556173.
 » http://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00125
- 10Martins NIM, Caldas PR, Cabral ED, Lins CCSA, Coriolano MGWS. Instrumentos de avaliação cognitiva utilizados nos últimos cinco anos em idosos brasileiros. Cien Saude Colet. 2019;24(7):2513-30. http://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232018247.20862017 PMid:31340270.
 » http://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232018247.20862017
- 11Dawes P, Reeves D, Yeung WK, Holland F, Charalambous AP, Côté M, et al. Development and validation of the Montreal cognitive assessment for people with hearing impairment (MoCA-H). J Am Geriatr Soc. 2023;71(5):1485-94. http://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.18241 PMid:36722180.
 » http://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.18241
- 12MoCA Cognition. MoCA Test: paper versions: MoCA hearing impairment [Internet]. Québec; 2024 [citado em 2024 Maio 5]. Disponível em: https://mocacognition.com/paper
 » https://mocacognition.com/paper
- 13Alexandre NMC, Coluci MZO. Validade de conteúdo nos processos de construção e adaptação de instrumentos de medidas. Cien Saude Colet. 2011;16(7):3061-8. http://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-81232011000800006 PMid:21808894.
 » http://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-81232011000800006
- 14Pasquali L. Psicometria. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2009;43(spe):992-9. http://doi.org/10.1590/S0080-62342009000500002
 » http://doi.org/10.1590/S0080-62342009000500002
- 15Polit DF, Yang FM. Measurement and the measurement of change. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2016.
- 16Pacico JC, Hutz CS. Validade. In: Hutz CS, Bandeira DR, Trentini CM, editores. Psicometria. Porto Alegre: Artmed; 2015. p. 71-84.
- 17Chaves ML, Izquierdo Y. Differential diagnosis between dementia and depression: a study of efficiency increment. Acta Neurol Scand. 1992;85(6):378-82. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0404.1992.tb06032.x PMid:1642108.
 » http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0404.1992.tb06032.x
- 18Kochhann R, Varela JS, Lisboa CSM, Chaves MLF. The Mini Mental State Examination: review of cutoff points adjusted for schooling in a large Southern Brazilian sample. Dement Neuropsychol. 2010;4(1):35-41. http://doi.org/10.1590/S1980-57642010DN40100006 PMid:29213658.
 » http://doi.org/10.1590/S1980-57642010DN40100006
- 19Akoglu H. User’s guide to correlation coefficients. Turk J Emerg Med. 2018;18(3):91-3. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjem.2018.08.001 PMid:30191186.
 » http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjem.2018.08.001
- 20Völter C, Fricke H, Faour S, Lueg G, Nasreddine ZS, Götze L, et al. Validation of the German Montreal-Cognitive-Assessment- H for hearing-impaired. Front Aging Neurosci. 2023;15:1209385. http://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2023.1209385 PMid:37539344.
 » http://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2023.1209385
- 21Ng KP, Chiew HJ, Lim L, Rosa-Neto P, Kandiah N, Gauthier S. The influence of language and culture on cognitive assessment tools in the diagnosis of early cognitive impairment and dementia. Expert Rev Neurother. 2018;18(11):859-69. http://doi.org/10.1080/14737175.2018.1532792 PMid:30286681.
 » http://doi.org/10.1080/14737175.2018.1532792
- 22Carson N, Leach L, Murphy KJ. A re-examination of Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) cutoff scores. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2018;33(2):379-88. http://doi.org/10.1002/gps.4756 PMid:28731508.
 » http://doi.org/10.1002/gps.4756
- 23Do M, Ha Bui BK, Pham NK, Anglewicz P, Nguyen L, Nguyen T, et al. Validation of MoCA test in vietnamese language for cognitive impairment screening. JoGHNP. 2022;e2022008. http://doi.org/10.52872/001c.35656
 » http://doi.org/10.52872/001c.35656
- 24Nazem S, Siderowf AD, Duda JE, Tem Have T, Colcher A, Horn SS, et al. Montreal cognitive assessment performance in patients with parkinson’s disease with “normal” global cognition according to mini-mental state examination score. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009;57(2):304-8. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02096.x PMid:19170786.
 » http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02096.x
- 25Vásquez KA, Valverde EM, Aguilar DV, Gabarain HJH. Montreal cognitive assessment scale in patients with parkinson disease with normal scores in the mini-mental state examination. Dement Neuropsychol. 2019;13(1):78-81. http://doi.org/10.1590/1980-57642018dn13-010008 PMid:31073382.
 » http://doi.org/10.1590/1980-57642018dn13-010008
- 26Memória CM, Yassuda MS, Nakano EY, Forlenza OV. Brief screening for mild cognitive impairment: validation of the Brazilian version of the Montreal cognitive assessment. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2013;28(1):34-40. http://doi.org/10.1002/gps.3787 PMid:22368034.
 » http://doi.org/10.1002/gps.3787
- 27Cecato JF, Montiel JM, Bartholomeu D, Martinelli JE. Poder preditivo do MoCA na avaliação neuropsicológica de pacientes com diagnóstico de demência. Rev Bras Geriatr Gerontol. 2014;17(4):707-19. http://doi.org/10.1590/1809-9823.2014.13123
 » http://doi.org/10.1590/1809-9823.2014.13123
- 28Calamia M, Markon K, Tranel D. scoring higher the second time around: meta-analyses of practice effects in neuropsychological assessment. Clin Neuropsychol. 2012;26(4):543-70. http://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2012.680913 PMid:22540222.
 » http://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2012.680913
- 29Salthouse TA, Toth J, Daniels K, Parks C, Pak R, Wolbrette M, et al. Effects of aging on efficiency of task switching in a variant of the trail making test. Neuropsychology. 2000;14(1):102-11. http://doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.14.1.102 PMid:10674802.
 » http://doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.14.1.102
- 30Konstantopoulos K, Vogazianos P, Doskas T. Normative data of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in the Greek population and parkinsonian dementia. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2016;31(3):246-53. http://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acw002 PMid:26891720.
 » http://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acw002
- 31Borland E, Nägga K, Nilsson PM, Minthon L, Nilsson ED, Palmqvist S. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment: normative data from a large swedish population-based cohort. J Alzheimers Dis. 2017;59(3):893-901. http://doi.org/10.3233/JAD-170203 PMid:28697562.
 » http://doi.org/10.3233/JAD-170203
- 32Conti S, Bonazzi S, Laiacona M, Masina M, Coralli MV. Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)-Italian version: regression based norms and equivalent scores. Neurol Sci. 2015;36(2):209-14. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-014-1921-3 PMid:25139107.
 » http://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-014-1921-3
- 33Kopecek M, Stepankova H, Lukavsky J, Ripova D, Nikolai T, Bezdicek O. Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA): normative data for old and very old Czech adults. Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2017;24(1):23-9. http://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2015.1065261 PMid:27144665.
 » http://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2015.1065261
Submitted date:
08/13/2024
Accepted date:
01/03/2025
 
					

 Facebook
 Facebook Google+
 Google+ Twitter
 Twitter LinkedIn
 LinkedIn Mendeley
 Mendeley StumbleUpon
 StumbleUpon CiteULike
 CiteULike Reddit
 Reddit Email
 Email
 Email
 Email