Utility of the mini-cog for detection of cognitive impairment in primary care: data from two spanish studies.

Objectives. To study the utility of the Mini-Cog test for detection of patients with cognitive impairment (CI) in primary care (PC). Methods. We pooled data from two phase III studies conducted in Spain. Patients with complaints or suspicion of CI were consecutively recruited by PC physicians. The cognitive diagnosis was performed by an expert neurologist, after formal neuropsychological evaluation. The Mini-Cog score was calculated post hoc, and its diagnostic utility was evaluated and compared with the utility of the Mini-Mental State (MMS), the Clock Drawing Test (CDT), and the sum of the MMS and the CDT (MMS + CDT) using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). The best cut points were obtained on the basis of diagnostic accuracy (DA) and kappa index. Results. A total sample of 307 subjects (176 CI) was analyzed. The Mini-Cog displayed an AUC (±SE) of 0.78 ± 0.02, which was significantly inferior to the AUC of the CDT (0.84 ± 0.02), the MMS (0.84 ± 0.02), and the MMS + CDT (0.86 ± 0.02). The best cut point of the Mini-Cog was 1/2 (sensitivity 0.60, specificity 0.90, DA 0.73, and kappa index 0.48 ± 0.05). Conclusions. The utility of the Mini-Cog for detection of CI in PC was very modest, clearly inferior to the MMS or the CDT. These results do not permit recommendation of the Mini-Cog in PC.

Expert study: A bolus calculator improves glycemic control and quality of life of type 1 diabetic patients (T1DM) (preliminary results)

Aims: To evaluate the impact on glycemic control and quality of life of a bolus calculator. Methods: Multicentre randomized prospective crosssectional study. Patients were randomized to control phase (3 months; calculation of prandial insulin according to insulinto-carbohydrate ratio and insulin sensitivity factor using a single strip meter) or intervention phase (3 months; calculation of prandial insulin with a bolus advisor), with a washout period (3 months). Patients wore a continuous glucosensor (7 days) and answered a quality of life questionnaire at the beginning and at the end of each phase. A questionnaire of satisfaction was obtained at the end of both phases. Inclusion criteria: Adults; T1DM> 1 year, HbA1c > 7.5%, basal-bolus therapy with insulin analogs, experience with carbohydrate Results: Data from the first 32 subjects with at least 1 ended phase (27 females, age 38 – 11 years, diabetes duration 16.8 – 7.5 years). Basal characteristics were comparable independently of the starting phase. No differences were found between phases in terms of mean blood glucose, standard deviation (from meter neither from sensor) and satisfaction. Conclusions: The use of a bolus calculator improves glycemic control and quality of life of T1DM subjects.