ABSTRACT
Mobile device-based cognitive screening has the potential to overcome the limitations in diagnostic precision and efficiency that characterize conventional pen and paper cognitive screening. Several mobile device-based cognitive testing platforms have demonstrated usability in carefully selected populations. However, the usability of take-home mobile device-based cognitive screening in typical adult primary care patients requires further investigation. This study set out to test the usability of a prototype mobile device-based cognitive screening test in older adult primary care patients across a range of cognitive performance. Participants completed the St. Louis University Mental Status Examination (SLUMS) and then used a study-supplied mobile device application at home for 5 days. The application presented 7 modules: 5 digital adaptations of conventional cognitive tests, 1 game-like experience, and 1 free verbal response module. Participants completed the System Usability Scale (SUS) after using the application. A total of 51 individuals participated, with a median (IQR) age of 81 (74–85) years. Cognitive impairment (SLUMS score < 27) was present in 30 (59%) of participants. The mean (95% Confidence Interval [CI]) SUS score was 76 (71–81), which indicates good usability. Usability scores were similar across ranges of cognitive impairment. SLUMS score predicted early withdrawal from the study with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (95% CI) of 0.78 (0.58-0.97). Take-home mobile device-based cognitive testing is a usable strategy in older adult primary care patients across a range of cognitive function, but less viable in persons with severe cognitive impairment. Take-home mobile device-based testing could be part of a flexible cognitive testing and follow-up strategy that also includes mobile device-based testing in healthcare settings and pen-and-paper cognitive testing, depending on patient preferences and abilities.
AUTHOR SUMMARY Performance-based cognitive screeners play a critical role in the identification, triage, and management of persons with Major Neurocognitive Disorder in primary care, neurology, and geriatric psychiatry. Commonly used tests consume valuable medical provider time, can be unpleasant for patients, and provide minimal information about specific domains of cognition. Cognitive testing on a take-home mobile device could address these limitations. We tested the usability of a prototype cognitive testing application using take-home devices in 51 older adult primary care patients across a range of cognitive function. Participants found that the application had good usability, but more severe cognitive impairment predicted voluntary withdrawal from the study. These findings establish that take-home mobile device-based cognitive testing is usable among older adult primary care patients, especially those with less severe cognitive impairment.
Competing Interest Statement
LS, RW, JS, and AS have an interest in the development and commercialization of the prototype that was tested in this study.
Funding Statement
This work was funded by NIA SBIR 1R43AG076341-01.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Advarra Institutional Review Board Approved this study.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
A mistake was corrected in the Results section pertaining to the median SLUMS scores across dropout levels.
Data Availability
The authors will consider requests for data sharing
