Validation of the Russian Version of GPCOG and Its Testing for Screening of Significant Cognitive Impairment in Older and Oldest-Old Patients

Background. For screening of cognitive impairment (CI) in older and oldest-old patients, the GPCOG test seems promising.

Aim. The aim of this study was to validate the Russian version of GPCOG and to test it for significant CI screening in older and oldest-old patients.

Materials and methods. CI testing in geriatric patients involved the use of MMSE, Mini-Kog, and the Russian version of GPCOG. Validation process for the Russian version of GPCOG included testing its reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, as well as sensitivity and specificity. As part of the GPCOG testing, the results of CI screening were analyzed in various demographics, including male and female participants, individuals of varying ages, and those with different education levels. The data was analyzed using a variety of statistical techniques, including pairwise comparisons, ANOVA, correlation analyses, and ROC-analysis.

Results. The analysis was performed in a sample of 180 older and oldest-old patients and their informants. The Russian version of GPCOG demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency, with a Cronbach's alpha value of 0,785 for GPCOG-1 and 0,772 for GPCOG-2. The association between MMSE and Mini-Kog scores and the components of GPCOG varied depending on the degree of CI, providing further evidence of its validity. The sensitivity of the GPCOG-1, GPCOG-2, and GPCOG total scores were 82%, 87%, and 84%, respectively, which better than similar scores for MMSE and Mini-Kog. Comparable results were obtained when testing male and female individuals for all GPCOG components. The GPCOG testing outcomes were worse in patients of older age, as well as in patients without higher education (p < 0.05).

Conclusion. The Russian version of GPCOG has proven to be reliable, valid and informative tool and may be recommended for screening for significant CI in geriatric patients.

1. Sedova E.V., Paleev F.N., Starceva O.N. Osnovy geriatrii dlja vrachej pervichnogo zvena: uchebnometodicheskoe posobie. M.: MONIKI; 2019. (In Russ.).]

2. Gorshunova N.K, Medvedev N.V., Kaposhko Yu. Prevention of cognitive impairment in the activities of a general practitioner. Vrach. 2018;29(6):45–47. (In Russ.).] doi: 10.29296/25877305-2018-06-09

3. Patnode C.D., Perdue L.A., Rossom R.C., et al. Screening for Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. 2020 Feb 25;323(8):764-785. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.22258

4. Bogolepova AN, Vasenina EE, Gomzyakova NA, et al. Clinical Guidelines for Cognitive Disorders in Elderly and Older Patients. Zhurnal Nevrologii i Psikhiatrii imeni S.S. Korsakova. 2021;121(10‒3):6‒137. (In Russ.).] doi: 10.17116/jnevro20211211036

5. Vasenina EE, Levin OS, Sonin AG. Modern trends in epidemiology of dementia and management of patients with cognitive impairment. Zhurnal Nevrologii i Psikhiatrii imeni S.S. Korsakova. 2017;117(6‒2):87‒95. (In Russ.).] doi: 10.17116/jnevro20171176287-95

6. Kurbanova MM, Galayeva AA, Stefanovskaya YV, et al. Modern methods for the diagnosis of cognitive impairment. Russian Family Doctor. 2020;24(1):35‒44. (In Russ.).] doi:10.17816/RFD18986

7. Half of primary care doctors say they aren’t ready for increase in Alzheimer’s cases. FierceHealthcare. March 11, 2020. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/practices/halfprimary-care-doctors-say-they-aren-t-ready-for-increase-alzheimers-cases

8. Brodaty H., Kemp N.M., Low L.F. Characteristics of the GPCOG, a screening tool for cognitive impairment. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2004 Sep;19(9):870-4. doi: 10.1002/gps.1167.

9. Brodaty H., Pond D., Kemp N.M., et al. The GPCOG: a new screening test for dementia designed for general practice. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002 Mar;50(3):530-4. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50122.x.

10. Brodaty H., Low L.F., Gibson L., Burns K. What is the best dementia screening instrument for general practitioners to use? Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2006 May;14(5):391-400. doi: 10.1097/01.JGP.0000216181.20416.b2. PMID: 16670243.

11. Brodaty H., Connors M.H., Loy C., et al. Screening for Dementia in Primary Care: A Comparison of the GPCOG and the MMSE. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2016;42(5-6):323-330. doi: 10.1159/000450992

12. Pirani A., Brodaty H., Martini E., et al. The validation of the Italian version of the GPCOG (GPCOG-It): a contribution to crossnational implementation of a screening test for dementia in general practice. Int Psychogeriatr. 2010 Feb;22(1):82-90. doi: 10.1017/S104161020999113X.

13. Li X., Xiao S., Fang Y., et al. Validation of the General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition — Chinese version (GPCOG-C) in China. Int Psychogeriatr. 2013 Oct;25(10):1649-57. doi: 10.1017/S1041610213001117.

14. Rashedi V., Foroughan M., Nazari H., Seeher K., Brodaty H. Validity and reliability of the Persian version of general practitioner assessment of cognition (P-GPCOG). Aging & Mental Health. 2019; 23:8, 961-965. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2018.1473840

15. Ionova TI, Frolova EV, Ovakimyan KV, et al. Linguistic and cultural adaptation of the Russian version of general practitioner assessment of cognition questionnaire ― GPCOG in elderly and senile patients at the primary care level. Zhurnal Nevrologii i Psikhiatrii imeni S.S. Korsakova. 2022;122(12):117–127. (In Russ., In Engl.) doi: https://doi.org/10.17116/jnevro2022122121117

16. Ionova TI, Frolova EV, Ovakimyan KV, et al. The use of the MiniCog, MMSE, and GPCOG tests in domestic clinical practice for the evaluation of cognitive disorders in elderly and senile patients: the results of a survey of experts’ opinions. Zhurnal Nevrologii i Psikhiatrii imeni S.S. Korsakova. 2023;123(7):55‒64. (In Russ.)]. doi: 10.17116/jnevro202312307155

17. Ionova TI, Frolova EV, Ovakimyan KV, et al. The use of MMSE, Mini-Cog and GPCOG tests to assess cognitive impairment in geriatric patients: the survey among patients and their informants. Bulletin of the Multinational Center for Quality of Life Research. 2023; 41–42: in press. (In Russ.)]

18. Folstein M.F., Folstein S.E., McHugh P.R. «Mini-mental state». A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975 Nov;12(3):189-98. doi: 10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6.

19. Borson S., Scanlan J.M., Chen P.J., et al. The Mini-Cog as a screen for dementia: validation in a population-based sample. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003 Oct;51(10):1451-4. doi: 10.1046/j.15325415.2003.51465.x. PMID: 14511167.

20. Mudrov VA. ROC curve analysis algorithm in biomedical research using SPSS software package. ENI Zabajkal'skij medicinskij vestnik. 2021;1:148‒154. (In Russ.).] doi : 10.52485/19986173_2021_1_148

21. Global action plan on the public health response to dementia 2017‒2025. WHO. 2017. 44 p.

22. GBD 2019 Dementia Forecasting Collaborators. Estimation of the global prevalence of dementia in 2019 and forecasted prevalence in 2050: an analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet Public Health. 2022 Feb;7(2):e105–e125. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00249-8.

23. Yakhno NN, Tkacheva ON, Gavrilova SI, et al. Comprehensive interdisciplinary and interdepartmental program for prevention, early detection, diagnosis and treatment of cognitive disorders in older and senile people. Russian Journal of Geriatric Medicine. 2022;1(9):6–16. (In Russ.).] doi: 10.37586/2686-8636-1-2022-6-16

24. Prinsen C.A.C., Mokkink L.B., Bouter L.M., et al. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(5):1147-1157. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-1798-3.