| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
From Harvard Medical School Department of Psychiatry and VA Boston Healthcare System (R.J.G., J.M., M.J.K., J.C.A.), Boston, MA; and Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences (A.R.A.), University of Louisville, KY.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Ronald J. Gurrera, VA Boston Healthcare System, 940 Belmont Street (116A), Brockton, MA 02301; e-mail: Ronald.Gurrera{at}med.va.gov or Ronald_Gurrera{at}hms.harvard.edu
Objective: To examine the contribution of neuropsychological test performance to treatment decision-making capacity in community volunteers with mild to moderate dementia.
Methods: The authors recruited volunteers (44 men, 44 women) with mild to moderate dementia from the community. Subjects completed a battery of 11 neuropsychological tests that assessed auditory and visual attention, logical memory, language, and executive function. To measure decision making capacity, the authors administered the Capacity to Consent to Treatment Interview, the Hopemont Capacity Assessment Interview, and the MacCarthur Competence Assessment Tool—Treatment. Each of these instruments individually scores four decisional abilities serving capacity: understanding, appreciation, reasoning, and expression of choice. The authors used principal components analysis to generate component scores for each ability across instruments, and to extract principal components for neuropsychological performance.
Results: Multiple linear regression analyses demonstrated that neuropsychological performance significantly predicted all four abilities. Specifically, it predicted 77.8% of the common variance for understanding, 39.4% for reasoning, 24.6% for appreciation, and 10.2% for expression of choice. Except for reasoning and appreciation, neuropsychological predictor (ß) profiles were unique for each ability.
Conclusions: Neuropsychological performance substantially and differentially predicted capacity for treatment decisions in individuals with mild to moderate dementia. Relationships between elemental cognitive function and decisional capacity may differ in individuals whose decisional capacity is impaired by other disorders, such as mental illness.
Editorial, see page 1298
See also page 1361
Supported by NIMH R29 MH57104 (J.M., PI) and Department of Veterans Affairs medical research funds.
Disclosure: The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Received May 31, 2005. Accepted in final form January 19, 2006.
Related Articles
Neurology 2006 66: 1292-1293.
Neurology 2006 66: 1298-1299.
Neurology 2006 66: 1361-1366.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. Moye and D. C. Marson Assessment of Decision-Making Capacity in Older Adults: An Emerging Area of Practice and Research Focus, January 1, 2009; 7(1): 88 - 97. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Dawson Mental capacity and psychiatric admission BMJ, June 30, 2008; 337(jun30_1): a116 - a116. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. S. Appelbaum Assessment of Patients' Competence to Consent to Treatment N. Engl. J. Med., November 1, 2007; 357(18): 1834 - 1840. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Moye, S. W. Butz, D. C. Marson, E. Wood, and the ABA APA Capacity Assessment of Older Adults Wo A Conceptual Model and Assessment Template for Capacity Evaluation in Adult Guardianship Gerontologist, October 1, 2007; 47(5): 591 - 603. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Moye and D. C. Marson Assessment of Decision-Making Capacity in Older Adults: An Emerging Area of Practice and Research J. Gerontol. B. Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci., January 1, 2007; 62(1): P3 - P11. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Y.H. Kim and K. Kieburtz Appointing a proxy for research consent after one develops dementia: The need for further study Neurology, May 9, 2006; 66(9): 1298 - 1299. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
