Search

Objective: There is no established minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) index and total scale scores. This study aimed to estimate the MCID for the RBANS index scores and total scale score.Method: Participants included 1,856 ethnic Chinese, older adults. Distribution- and anchor-based methods were used to estimate values for the MCID. Distribution-based estimates were calculated as the standard error of measurement (SEM) and .5 standard deviations (SD). For anchor-based estimates, we compared RBANS scores between the clinical dementia rating (CDR) scale no dementia and very mild dementia groups and between the clinical assessment of dementia (CAD) cognitively normal and mild cognitive impairment groups using regression models adjusting for demographic characteristics.Results: Estimates from the CDR anchor were 7.79, 8.63, 10.74, 9.74, 5.61, and 3.77 for the total scale score, language, immediate memory, delayed memory, visuospatial/constructional, and the attention index, respectively. Estimates from the distribution-based methods were similar to the estimates based on the CDR, except for the language and attention indexes. Estimates from the CAD anchor were larger.Conclusions: We estimated the MCID for the total scale score, language, immediate memory, delayed memory, visuospatial/constructional, and attention indexes of the RBANS as 8, 9, 10, 10, 6, and 4 points, respectively. These estimates are best suited to discriminate between patient groups, for example, in a clinical trial setting. Further research is needed using longitudinal data to assess their applicability to assess within patient differences. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

There is a paucity of normative studies outside of North America and on elderly populations with very low education level. In the present study we examined the performance of poorly educated elderly on the Repeatable Battery Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) with 352 cognitively normal elderly Chinese persons living in the community in Singapore who were enrolled in the Singapore Longitudinal Ageing Study (SLAS). Those with no formal education performed significantly less well than those with some years of formal education across four of five RBANS indices as well as the Total Scale score. Age- and education-adjusted normative data for the RBANS were established for the sample. The means and standard deviations of each of 12 subtests raw scores, five Index scores and the Total Scale score were calculated and stratified by age and education. Data from the present study should considerably advance the clinical utility of the RBANS in Chinese geriatric evaluations in Singapore, and can serve as a reference source for poorly educated elderly Chinese from around the region and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]