Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Neurological Sciences
Published in: Neurological Sciences 11/2022

16-08-2022 | Stroke | Original Article

The Dutch Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS-NL): psychometric properties in Flemish stroke survivors

Authors: Hanne Huygelier, Brenda Schraepen, Marijke Miatton, Lies Welkenhuyzen, Karla Michiels, Eline Note, Christophe Lafosse, Hella Thielen, Robin Lemmens, Rose Bruffaerts, Nele Demeyere, Céline R. Gillebert

Published in: Neurological Sciences | Issue 11/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background and purpose

The Oxford Cognitive Screen is a stroke-specific screen to evaluate attention, executive functions, memory, praxis, language, and numeric cognition. It was originally validated in England for acute stroke patients. In this study, we examined the psychometric properties of the Dutch OCS (OCS-NL).

Methods

A total of 193 (99 acute stroke unit, 94 rehabilitation unit) patients were included in our study. A subset of patients (n = 128) completed a retest with the parallel version of the OCS-NL.

Results

First, we did not find evidence for a difference in prevalence of impairment between patients in the acute stroke versus rehabilitation unit on all but one of the subtests. For praxis, we observed a 14% lower prevalence of impairment in the rehabilitation than the acute stroke unit. Second, the parallel-form reliability ranged from weak to excellent across subtests. Third, in stroke patients below age 60, the OCS-NL had a 92% sensitivity relative to the MoCA, while the MoCA had a 55% sensitivity relative to the OCS-NL. Last, although left-hemispheric stroke patients performed worse on almost all MoCA subdomains, they performed similarly to right-hemispheric stroke patients on non-language domains on the OCS-NL.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that the OCS-NL is a reliable cognitive screen that can be used in acute stroke and rehabilitation units. The OCS-NL may be more sensitive to detect cognitive impairment in young stroke patients and less likely to underestimate cognitive abilities in left-hemispheric stroke patients than the MoCA.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
BF (Bayes factor) quantifies the relative strength of evidence in favor of the alternative versus null hypothesis. A BF10 > 3 is considered substantial evidence in favor of the alternative hypothesis, while a BF10 < 0.33 is considered substantial evidence in favor of the null hypothesis [33].
 
2
Note that, because we retested patients only with the parallel form and not with the same form, our study does not allow to disentangle test–retest from parallel-form reliability.
 
Literature
1.
Demeyere N, Riddoch MJ, Slavkova ED, Bickerton W, Humphreys GW (2015) The Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS): validation of a stroke-specific short cognitive screening tool. Psychol Assess 27:883–894CrossRefPubMed
2.
Demeyere N et al (2016) Domain-specific versus generalized cognitive screening in acute stroke. J Neurol 263:306–315CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
Kosgallana A, Cordato D, Chan DKY, Yong J (2019) Use of cognitive screening tools to detect cognitive impairment after an ischaemic stroke: a systematic review. SN Compr Clin Med 1:255–262CrossRef
5.
Stolwyk RJ, O’Neill MH, McKay AJD, Wong DK (2014) Are cognitive screening tools sensitive and specific enough for use after stroke?: a systematic literature review. Stroke 45:3129–3134CrossRefPubMed
6.
Kong AP-H et al (2016) The Hong Kong version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (HK-OCS): validation study for Cantonese-speaking chronic stroke survivors. Aging Neuropsychol Cogn 23:530–548CrossRef
7.
Hong W et al (2018) Psychometric properties of the Chinese (Putonghua) version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS-P) in subacute poststroke patients without neglect. BioMed Res Int 2018:1–12
8.
Mancuso M et al (2016) Italian normative data for a stroke specific cognitive screening tool: The Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS). Neurol Sci 37:1713–1721CrossRefPubMed
9.
10.
11.
12.
Valera-Gran D et al (2019) Validation of the Spanish version of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (S-OCS): psychometric properties of a short cognitive stroke-specific screening tool. Clin Rehabil 33:724–736CrossRefPubMed
13.
14.
15.
Patel M, Coshall C, Rudd AG, Wolfe CD (2003) Natural history of cognitive impairment after stroke and factors associated with its recovery. Clin Rehabil 17:158–166CrossRefPubMed
16.
Cramer SC (2008) Repairing the human brain after stroke: I. Mechanisms of spontaneous recovery Ann Neurol 63:272–287PubMed
17.
Nijboer TC, Kollen BJ, Kwakkel G (2013) Time course of visuospatial neglect early after stroke: a longitudinal cohort study. Cortex 49:2021–2027CrossRefPubMed
18.
Gray CS et al (1989) Recovery of visual fields in acute stroke: homonymous hemianopia associated with adverse prognosis. Age Ageing 18:419–421CrossRefPubMed
19.
Farnè A et al (2004) Patterns of spontaneous recovery of neglect and associated disorders in acute right brain-damaged patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 75:1401–1410CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
20.
Wade DT, Wood VA, Hewer RL (1988) Recovery of cognitive function soon after stroke: a study of visual neglect, attention span and verbal recall. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 51:10–13CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
21.
Basso A, Capitani E, Sala SD, Laiacona M, Spinnler H (1987) Recovery from ideomotor apraxia: a study on acute stroke patients. Brain 110:747–760CrossRefPubMed
22.
Donkervoort M, Dekker J, Deelman B (2006) The course of apraxia and ADL functioning in left hemisphere stroke patients treated in rehabilitation centres and nursing homes. Clin Rehabil 20:1085–1093CrossRefPubMed
23.
Lazar RM, Antoniello D (2008) Variability in recovery from aphasia. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 8:497–502CrossRefPubMed
24.
Nys GMS et al (2005) Domain-specific cognitive recovery after first-ever stroke: a follow-up study of 111 cases. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 11:795–806CrossRefPubMed
25.
Ilett PA, Brock KA, Graven CJ, Cotton SM (2010) Selecting patients for rehabilitation after acute stroke: are there variations in practice? Arch Phys Med Rehabil 91:788–793CrossRefPubMed
26.
Claessen MHG (2021) Screenen op cognitieve stoornissen na CVA: Ervaringen met de Oxford Cognitive Screen-NL (OCS-NL). Tijdschr Voor Neuropsychol 16:116–122
27.
Chan E, Altendorff S, Healy C, Werring DJ, Cipolotti L (2017) The test accuracy of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) by stroke lateralisation. J Neurol Sci 373:100–104CrossRefPubMed
28.
Moafmashhadi P, Koski L (2013) Limitations for interpreting failure on individual subtests of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 26:19–28CrossRefPubMed
29.
30.
Malek-Ahmadi M et al (2015) Age- and education-adjusted normative data for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in older adults age 70–99. Aging Neuropsychol Cogn 22:755–761CrossRef
31.
Wong A et al (2015) Montreal Cognitive Assessment: one cutoff never fits all. Stroke 46:3547–3550CrossRefPubMed
32.
Hessler J, Tucha O, Förstl H, Mösch E, Bickel H (2014) Age-correction of test scores reduces the validity of mild cognitive impairment in predicting progression to dementia. PLoS ONE 9:e106284CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
33.
Kass RE, Raftery AE (1995) Bayes factors. J Am Stat Assoc 90:773–795
34.
Nasreddine ZS et al (2005) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 53:695–699CrossRefPubMed
35.
Metadata
Title
The Dutch Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS-NL): psychometric properties in Flemish stroke survivors
Authors
Hanne Huygelier
Brenda Schraepen
Marijke Miatton
Lies Welkenhuyzen
Karla Michiels
Eline Note
Christophe Lafosse
Hella Thielen
Robin Lemmens
Rose Bruffaerts
Nele Demeyere
Céline R. Gillebert
Publication date
16-08-2022
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Neurological Sciences / Issue 11/2022
Print ISSN: 1590-1874
Electronic ISSN: 1590-3478
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-022-06314-2

Other articles of this Issue 11/2022

Neurological Sciences 11/2022 Go to the issue

Original Article

Prevalence of chronic comorbidities in people with multiple sclerosis: descriptive study based on administrative data in Tuscany (Central Italy)

Letter to the Editor

Painful legs and moving toes syndrome associated with dementia with Lewy bodies responsive to rotigotine-induced analgesia

Correction

Correction to: Effects of low-intensity training on the brain and muscle in the congenital muscular dystrophy 1D model

Original Article

Muscle and skin fibroblast TDP-43 expression, dynamic mutation analysis of NOTCH2NLC and C9orf72 in patients with FOSMN

Review Article

Elusive amines: migraine depends on biochemical abnormalities

Correction

Correction to: The cognitive phenotypes of Creutzfeldt‑Jakob disease: comparison with secondary metabolic encephalopathy