Question
How Does Cognivue Compare to Other Cognitive Screening Instruments in Assessing Cognitive Function?
Answer
According to the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA),1 cognitive screening is within the scope of practice in audiology. (Note: Providers should consult with their State Licensing Board to ensure that cognitive screening is consistent with current legal practice guidelines.) In this role, audiologists can:
- monitor cognitive performance over time, like hearing screenings performed in occupational audiology,
- use screening outcomes to provide guidance with respect to treatment interventions (e.g., negative effects of too much hearing aid compression), and
- provide whole-body (i.e., integrated care) to patients, and make appropriate interprofessional referrals, through early identification of changes in cognitive function.
To provide these services and practice at the top of one’s scope/license requires the screening instrument to be as effective as other instruments available on the market.
Cognivue Assessment Compared to the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)
The Cognivue Clarity technology was recently compared to the MoCA.2 One hundred adults, aged > 55 years, completed two sessions no more than two weeks apart in which both the Cognivue and MoCA tests were administered. For overall scores, Cognivue demonstrated a statistically significant, positive correlation with MoCA. This outcome indicates that conclusions drawn with the Cognivue assessment agree with findings on the MoCA. In addition, test-retest reliability (i.e., initial test scores compared to retest scores) was greater for Cognivue than MoCA for participants classified as not having cognitive impairment.
Cognivue Assessment Compared to the St. Louis University Mental Status (SLUMS) Assessment
The Cognivue test has also been validated against the SLUMS test.3 To assess validity, 401 adults (55-95 years) participated, and their scores were compared between tests. Results revealed that Cognivue scores were in good agreement with SLUMS scores. For reliability, 358 adults (of the 401 adults) completed two sessions of testing no more than two weeks apart. Reliability results revealed a superior test-retest reliability for Cognivue compared to SLUMS.
Summary
Cognivue offers providers a valid and reliable option in the screening of cognitive function for patients with hearing loss seen in their clinics. Outcomes from this FDA-cleared, fully computerized, self-administered, brief cognitive screening tool supplies the provider with information—that is in addition to the standard diagnostic and treatment outcomes—regarding how best to treat, refer, and manage their patients’ healthcare needs as part of the patient-centered care model.
To learn more about Cognivue Thrive, please visit the AudiologyOnline partner page.
1 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2018). Scope of practice in audiology. Retrieved from https://www2.asha.org/uploadedFiles/SP2018-00353.pdf
2 Ma F. (2021). Clinical validation of Cognivue – A computerized alternative to the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test. Neurological Sciences and Neurosurgery, 2. https://doi.org/10.47275/2692-093X-116
3 Cahn-Hidalgo D, Estes PW, Benabou R. (2020). Validity, reliability, and psychometric properties of a computerized, cognitive assessment test (Cognivue). World Journal of Psychiatry, 10, 1-11.
