The Screening Utility and Ecological Validity of the Neuropsychological Assessment Battery Bill Payment Subtest in Older Adults with and without Dementia.

The Neuropsychological Assessment Battery Bill Payment subtest has shown strong diagnostic accuracy in dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) versus non-AD. Its relationship to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or all-cause dementia has not been fully examined nor has its ecological validity as a proxy of financial independence. We describe 270 women (63%) and men (age = 72 ± 8.39) who completed Bill Payment during outpatient neuropsychological evaluation. Seventy-one were cognitively normal (CN), 160 had MCI, and 39 had Dementia. Two hundred fourteen were independent in money management, 31 were assisted (had oversight/some help), and 25 were dependent (relied on others). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves tested Bill Payment's utility as a dementia screen. Kruskal-Wallis tests examined whether Bill Payment differed by levels of financial independence. At a cutoff of 17, Bill Payment had strong sensitivity (0.87) and specificity (0.80) for dementia versus CN cases. A cutoff of 15 distinguished dementia from MCI (Sn = 0.64, Sp = 0.85), whereas a cutoff of 16 distinguished dementia from functionally unimpaired cases (MCI + CN) with greater sensitivity and similar specificity (Sn = 0.74, Sp = 0.81). Sensitivity attenuated in MCI versus CN cases (Sn = 0.46, Sp = 0.83). Those who were independent in money management had higher scores than assisted and dependent cases (p ≤ 0.046). Assisted and dependent cases were no different (p > 0.05). Bill Payment is a valid screen of all-cause dementia. Lower Bill Payment scores may mark subtle functional decline beyond cognitive impairment alone. Specifically, results provide preliminary evidence of Bill Payment's ecological validity as a measure related to financial independence. It may prove useful when impaired financial abilities are suspected but unreported.

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [e-mail].