NeuROLOGY BOARD ReVIew MANuAL … · The Hospital Physician Neurology Board Review Manual is a peer-reviewed study guide for ... The patient reports experiencing “short-term

www.turner-white.com NeurologyVolume 13, Part 4 �

Statement of editorial PurPoSe

The Hospital Physician Neurology Board Review Manual is a peer-reviewed study guide for residents and practicing physicians preparing for board examinations in neurology. Each manual reviews a topic essential to the cur-rent practice of neurology.

PuBliSHinG Staff

PRESIDENT, GRouP PuBLISHERBruce M. White

SENIoR EDIToRRobert Litchkofski

aSSISTaNT EDIToRFarrawh Charles

ExEcuTIvE vIcE PRESIDENTBarbara T. White

ExEcuTIvE DIREcToR of oPERaTIoNS

Jean M. Gaul

PRoDucTIoN DIREcToRSuzanne S. Banish

PRoDucTIoN aSSISTaNTNadja V. Frist

SaLES & maRkETING maNaGERDeborah D. Chavis

Copyright 2009, Turner White Communications, Inc., Strafford Avenue, Suite 220, Wayne, PA 19087-3391, www.turner-white.com. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, mechanical, electronic, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of Turner White Communications. The preparation and distribution of this publication are supported by sponsorship control over the design and production of all published materials, including selection of topics and preparation of editorial content. The authors are solely respon-sible for substantive content. Statements expressed reflect the views of the authors and not necessarily the opinions or policies of Turner White Communications. Turner White Communications accepts no responsibility for statements made by authors and will not be liable for any errors of omission or inaccuracies. Information contained within this publication should not be used as a substitute for clinical judgment.

NoTE fRom THE PuBLISHER:This publication has been developed with-out involvement of or review by the Amer-ican Board of Psychiatry and Neurology.

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Case1:A71-Year-OldManwithMemoryLoss. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Case2:AManwithTraumaticBrainInjury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Case3:A66-Year-OldManwithCognitiveandBehavioralDifficulties.8

Case4:A9-Year-OldGirlwithReadingDifficulty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

TableofContents

CoverIllustrationbyNadjaV.Frist

NeuROLOGYBOARDReVIewMANuAL

NeuropsychologicalevaluationinClinicalPractice:CaseInterpretationandTreatmenteditors:AlirezaAtri,MD,PhDInstructor in Neurology, Harvard Medical School; Assistant in Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Neurologist, Geriatric Research Education & Clinical Center, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Bedford, MA

TraceyA.Milligan,MDInstructor in Neurology, Harvard Medical School; Associate Neurologist, Brigham and Women’s and Faulkner Hospitals, Boston, MA

Contributors:Lynnw.Shaughnessy,MADoctoral Student, Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology, West Roxbury, MA

JanetC.Sherman,PhDAssistant Professor, Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School; Clinical Director, Psychology Assessment Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

MaureenK.O’Connor,PsyD,ABCNInstructor, Department of Neurology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA; Director of Neuropsychology, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, MA

� Hospital Physician Board Review Manual www.turner-white.com

NeuRology BoaRd Review MaNual

Neuropsychological evaluation in Clinical Practice: Case interpretation and Treatment

lynn w. Shaughnessy, Ma, Janet C. Sherman, Phd, and Maureen K. o’Connor, Psyd, aBCN

IntroductIon

This manual is the second half of a 2-part review of neuropsychology. The first part presented an overview of the practice of neuropsychology, focusing on the goals of a neuropsychological evaluation, its methods, and the cognitive domains assessed. In clinical practice, there are 4 main goals of a neuropsychological evalu-ation: (1) to assess a patient’s cognitive status across a range of domains to determine areas of strength and weakness; (2) to provide assistance in addressing questions pertaining to differential diagnosis; (3) to monitor cognitive status over time through repeat neuropsychological evaluations; and (4) to provide recommendations regarding possible treatments and interventions that can help patients and their families or help determine competency for managing instru-mental activities of daily living (eg, finances, medica-tion, appointments, driving). The neuropsychologist accomplishes these goals through both qualitative observation and quantitative data obtained by adminis-tration of standardized tests.

In this manual, we present clinical cases that il-lustrate essential concepts in neuropsychology and demonstrate how neuropsychological evaluations can contribute to a patient’s clinical care. In each case pre-sentation, we describe the patient’s background, symp-tom presentation and history, behavioral observations, test scores, interpretation of results, and treatment recommendations. For each case, the test data have been converted from raw scores to percentiles. These scores reflect the percentage of people in the general population who attain a lower score; the scores can be interpreted as indicating that the patient scores “better than ‘x’% of similar individuals who take the same test.” To facilitate interpretation and comparison of these val-ues, the percentile ranks are classified into descriptive ranges. The ranges used are as follows:

98th percentile and above = very superior

91st–97th percentile = superior

75th–90th percentile = high average

25th–74th percentile = average

9th–24th percentile = low average

3rd–8th percentile = borderline impaired

2nd percentile and below = impaired

It is notable that 3 of the 4 patients described are male; however, this is not meant to imply that the pre-sented conditions are gender specific or that males are more often referred for neuropsychological evaluation. Additionally, in an effort to provide clear and concise cases, we present cases involving individuals with aver-age estimated premorbid levels of functioning. It has been suggested that individuals with above average premorbid intelligence may possess “cognitive reserve” and in turn exhibit signs of memory loss or cognitive decline later in the disease process.1 This is an impor-tant concept when examining individuals with higher estimated premorbid levels of functioning, as they may score within the “average range” but still be experienc-ing initial symptoms of neurologic dysfunction.

cASE 1: A 71-YEAr-oLd MAn WItH MEMorY LoSS

cASE PrESEntAtIon And HIStorY

A 71-year-old right-handed man is referred for neuropsychological testing by his primary care

physician for evaluation of memory and cognitive func-tioning, assistance with differential diagnosis, and rec-ommendations regarding possible treatments and inter-ventions. The patient reports experiencing “short-term memory loss” for the past 3 to 4 years. Specifically, he describes some difficulty keeping track of his score when playing golf, remembering conversations, and remem-bering what he has read in the newspaper. The patient says that he feels his memory problems are minor and are caused by stress, and he notes that occasionally he

www.turner-white.com Neurology Volume 13, Part 4 �

N e u r o p s y c h o l o g i c a l E v a l u a t i o n i n C l i n i c a l P r a c t i c e : P a r t 2

feels his memory is improving. In contrast, the patient’s wife, who is present during the interview, describes a clear progression of memory problems over the past 3 to 4 years, which she feels are considerable. She explains that on 2 occasions her husband became lost while driv-ing in a familiar area. She notes that he is repetitive in conversation and asks repetitive questions. She also adds that he often forgets appointments and needs frequent reminders. The patient’s wife is particularly concerned about her husband’s functioning after watching her mother die from AD, and adds that because of this expe-rience she is hypervigilant about any memory problems her husband might be displaying. Regarding mood, the patient denies mood disturbance or change in mood and describes numerous activities he enjoys outside of the home. However, his wife reports an increase in ir-ritability, most notably when she reminds him to take his medications or tries to help him organize his office.

Medical history is significant only for glaucoma, re-portedly well controlled through medication. Medical records indicate that the patient has been seen previ-ously by a neurologist for memory concerns, who told him that he suffers from “age-related cognitive decline” and subsequently reassured him that his memory dif-ficulties are normal and not progressive.

The patient graduated from college and reportedly completed school with no academic difficulties. He has been retired from his industrial managerial position for approximately 5 years. When asked about family history, the patient states he is an only child; his mother died at age 50 years from a motor vehicle accident, and his father died in his late 80s of “old age.” The patient reports no family history of dementia, but noted that his maternal grandmother “went crazy” in her elder years and lived in a nursing home until she died at age 80 years; he cannot recount the specific details.

• what are the possible causes for this patient’s mem-ory problems?

A neurodegenerative dementia such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a consideration given the patient’s age, his 3- to 4-year history of progressive cognitive difficulties with problems most notably in the memory domain, and his behavioral history, including rep-etitiousness and getting lost in familiar places. Normal aging is a possibility, given his wife’s admission that she is hypervigilant about her husband’s memory since watching her mother’s battle with AD and the discrep-ancy between her report of considerable memory dif-ficulties and the patient’s report of only minor memory difficulties. If normal aging is responsible, this would be reflected on the neuropsychological evaluation by per-

formance within normal limits compared to same-age peers and his premorbid estimate of functioning.

cASE 1 nEuroPSYcHoLogIcAL EvALuAtIon

Following the clinical interview, the patient is administered a battery of neuropsychological

measures to assess cognitive functioning. A summary of the patient’s performance for each test is provided in Table 1. Behavioral observations during testing reveal euthymic mood and affect in full range. He is oriented to person and place; however, he is 5 years off in providing the date. He demonstrates intermittent word-finding difficulties during spontaneous speech but is articulate and fluent. He provides a detailed de-scription of remote history, but his report about events within the past 2 to 3 years is vague and less descriptive. He is very pleasant, cooperative, and responsive during the evaluation. There is no evidence of inappropri-ate behavior, verbalizations, or jocularity. The patient works diligently with full effort throughout. The results of the evaluation are therefore considered an accurate reflection of his cognitive ability at the time of the evaluation.

Premorbid intellectual functioning is estimated to fall within the average range based on his educational and occupational attainment and other demographic variables, and this estimate is consistent with his per-formance on a task of oral word reading. Compared to premorbid estimates, results reveal deficits within the memory domain, specifically on measures of delayed re-call and recognition for both verbal and visual material, with minor benefit from structure or context. Testing also shows minor reductions in executive functioning and simple attention, while working memory is intact. Language skills are preserved on neuropsychological measures, specifically confrontation naming and flu-ency tasks, despite word-finding difficulties in interview. Minimal depressive symptoms are endorsed.

• How does this cognitive profile inform the differen-tial diagnosis?

The differential diagnosis includes a degenerative dementia such as AD versus normal age-related cogni-tive decline. Examination of the cognitive profile reveals profound deficits within the domain of memory, spe-cifically with retention of new information and minor reductions in attention and executive functioning. The patient’s profile in conjunction with his wife’s report of progressive decline, with difficulties remembering appointments and driving (becoming lost in a familiar area) is most consistent with a diagnosis of AD and is not what would be expected in normal aging.



cASE 1 rEcoMMEndAtIonS And FoLLoW-uP EvALuAtIon

The patient and his wife are provided with psychoeducation about AD during feedback

and given information for local resources that provide programming to help them better understand the disease and the services available to them. A referral to a neurologist is made in order to follow the patient and consult regarding pharmacologic treatment with a cholinesterase inhibitor. Given reports of becoming lost while driving, in conjunction with the cognitive im-pairments noted on the evaluation, it is recommended that the patient either self-elect to discontinue driving or obtain a formal driving evaluation to determine whether it is safe for him to continue to drive. The severity of memory difficulties also suggests that the patient will need assistance with medication manage-ment and with important financial decisions. Also, it is suggested he may be a candidate for clinical trials.

Participation in clinical trials not only provides another treatment option, but also can offer the patient a sense of accomplishment in contributing to research and potentially benefiting individuals suffering from AD in the future. Finally, it is recommended that he return for a follow-up evaluation in 1 year to monitor cognitive functioning, aid in confirmation of diagnosis, and tailor additional treatment recommendations.

The patient returns for a follow-up neuropsychologi-cal evaluation approximately 2 years after initial testing. At this evaluation, the patient is being treated with a cholinesterase inhibitor, which was initiated following the first evaluation. Additionally, the patient’s wife now fully manages her husband’s medications, appoint-ments, and finances. She reports progressive worsening of her husband’s memory difficulties, noting that he typically cannot remember what he had for breakfast and continues to be repetitious. In contrast, the patient shows little awareness of his difficulties, reporting, “I

Table 1. Neuropsychological Test Findings for Case 1: Assessment Data

A = average; B = borderline; HA = high average; I = impaired; LA = low average.

CLVT = California Verbal Learning Test; WAIS = Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale; WMS = Wechsler Memory Scale.

Domain/Test Administered

Result/Percentile/ Classification

Evaluation 1 Evaluation 2

Mini-Mental State Examination2 27/30 23/30

Premorbid functioningWide Range Achievement Test-33 Average N/A

Attention/executive functionsWAIS-III4 subtests

Similarities 50th, A 47th, ADigit Symbol-Coding 49th, A 31st, ADigit Span Forward 21st, LA 21st, LADigit Span Backward 38th, A 38th, A

Controlled Word Association5

FAS 49th, A 40th, AAnimals 45th, A 10th, LA

Clock drawingCommand Borderline

impairedImpaired

Copy Intact Borderline impaired

Trail Making Test6

A (letter sequencing) 34th, A 3rd, BB (number-letter sequencing) 21st, LA < 1st, I

LanguageBoston Naming Test7 48th, A 40th, AWAIS-III subtest:

Vocabulary N/A 53rd, A

Domain/Test Administered

Result/Percentile/ Classification

Evaluation 1 Evaluation 2

MemoryVerbal memory

WMS-III8 subtestLogical Memory

Recall I 30th, A 10th, LARecall II 18th, LA 2nd, IRecognition 17th, LA 6th, B

CLVT—short form9

Word List Recall 5/6/6/7, 54th, A 3/3/4/5, 1st, IShort delay

Free 4 free, 7th, B 1 free, 1st, ILong delay

Free 2 free, 7th, B 1 free, 7th, BCued 2 cued, 1st, I 1 cued, 1st, IRecognition 6 hits/3 false

positives4 hits/6 false

positivesVisual memory

Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure10

Immediate recall 8th, B 1st, IDelayed recall 3rd, B < 1st, I

Visuoperceptual/visuospatial/visuoconstructional functioning

Rey-Osterrieth Complex FigureCopy 24th, LA 18th, LA

Hooper Visual Organization Test11 51st, A 16th, LA

Emotional functioningGeriatric Depression Scale12 4/30 within

normal limits2/30 within

normal limits



haven’t had too many problems.” Similarly, when asked about sleep, the patient describes getting a “perfect” 7 to 8 hours of sleep and denies taking daytime naps, while his wife reports that he sleeps “all the time,” from 9 pm to 10 am with frequent naps during the day. When asked about mood, the patient describes it as “just fine” and states that he is rarely down. His wife notes that he has been more irritable and agitated since the previous evaluation. She also reports an increase in apathy and a tendency to stay home rather than engage in social activities he previously enjoyed.

A comparison of the results from the 2 evaluations is shown in Table 2. The results of the second evaluation indicate progressive memory impairment, specifically continued difficulty with retention of new information. Executive functioning is now impaired, including in-creased difficulty initiating and maintaining set, trouble with cognitive flexibility, and notable disinhibition. The patient also exhibits greater difficulty with semantic flu-ency than phonemic fluency, which was not the case at the initial evaluation. His confrontation naming is now marked by circumlocutions, confabulations, and se-mantic paraphasic errors; word-finding difficulties are also more obvious in spontaneous speech. There is no decline in simple attention and working memory.

• How do these results contribute to our understand-ing of this patient’s difficulties?

The pattern of rapid forgetting, which is considered the hallmark of AD, is even more marked during the second evaluation. Executive functioning has contin-ued to decline. The patient’s greater impairment in se-mantic than phonemic fluency and impaired confron-tation naming are consistent with the semantic memory loss that also often accompanies AD pathology.13 These findings, in addition to reported behavioral history of functional decline, worsening memory difficulties, and behavioral changes including increased agitation and apathy, confirm the original diagnosis.

cASE 1 rEcoMMEndAtIonS And cASE rESoLutIon

The addition of memantine to the patient’s current cholinesterase inhibitor is suggested

given that combination therapy has been shown to slow both cognitive and functional decline in individuals with AD.14 The patient’s wife is encouraged to attend local support groups and discuss legal matters with the family. It is also stressed that maintaining organization and structure within the patient’s environment will help to reduce confusion and overstimulation.

Approximately 3 years after the second evalua-tion, the patient has significantly deteriorated both

cognitively and physically and is moved to a nursing home. He eventually becomes unable to walk without assistance and his sight deteriorates. He is scheduled for surgical treatment of his cataracts, and during the preoperative evaluation it is discovered that he has suffered a silent myocardial infarction. Soon after, he develops pneumonia and his family and clinical team decide, based on his preferences when he was well, that in view of his clinical decline, multiple medical prob-lems, and current pneumonia, he should not undergo any aggressive treatment. The patient is given comfort measures and dies peacefully. Brain autopsy confirms AD as the primary diagnosis.

cASE �: A MAn WItH trAuMAtIc BrAIn InJurY


A 49-year-old left-handed man is referred for a neuropsychological evaluation by his psycho-

therapist to determine cognitive strengths and weak-nesses and to assist in providing recommendations regarding possible treatments and/or interventions. The patient presents with a 10-year history of signifi-cant cognitive impairment since sustaining a traumatic brain injury (TBI) during a motor vehicle accident. Description of the injury indicates that the patient was unresponsive at the scene, with a documented 30-minute loss of consciousness. He was transported by ambulance to the hospital and discharged the same day after receiving medical attention, including a head computed tomography scan, which was normal. The patient experienced anterograde and retrograde amnesia for several hours surrounding the accident. Left-sided motor weakness caused by the accident has mostly subsided by the time of evaluation, although there is some reported residual weakness.

He and his wife report that the current cognitive diffi-culties seem to fluctuate, with some days better than oth-ers. Since the injury, he has had difficulty remembering conversations and needs reminders from his wife to take his medications. His wife has also taken over managing the household finances and has taken away his credit card and checkbook because he was buying items they could not afford. The patient reports becoming easily distracted; for example, when running errands he be-comes sidetracked and does not complete the errand. Similarly, he often leaves household chores halfway done because of distractions during the task. The patient re-ports misplacing items (keys, wallet) and being generally



disorganized. He reports that he frequently forgets ap-pointments and attempts to compensate for this by using a daily planner. Regarding mood, the patient reports feeling frustrated and explains that he has a significant amount of anger toward himself that he inadvertently directs toward others. His wife describes him as more ir-ritable, unpredictable, demanding, and easily frustrated. The patient had no psychiatric history prior to the ac-cident, but since his head injury he has experienced mood instability and an explosive temper. The patient also reports sleep disturbance, with trouble falling asleep and multiple night awakenings due to excessive worry. He denies appetite disturbance.

Medical history is significant for hyperlipidemia and osteoarthritis. At the time of the evaluation, he is see-ing the referring therapist for long-term care focused on family and individual psychoeducation regarding the effects of TBI and psychotherapeutic intervention aimed at addressing adjustment to life post-injury.

The patient completed high school and 1 year of college with no reported difficulty. He worked as a me-chanic prior to the accident. Although he is interested in returning to work, he has not returned due to his cognitive difficulties. The patient reports no significant family medical history and is the oldest of 6 siblings, all in good health. He and his wife have been married for 25 years and have 4 children.

• what is the significance of anterograde and retro-grade amnesia for events surrounding the accident in this patient’s diagnosis?

Impaired ability to learn and remember episodic information learned after a neurologic insult is called anterograde amnesia, often referred to in TBI cases as post-traumatic amnesia (PTA).15 Retrograde amnesia refers to loss of information learned prior to the in-jury. Individuals with TBI may experience some extent of PTA and/or retrograde amnesia surrounding the traumatic event. When assessing TBI, determining the extent of loss of consciousness and amnesia surround-ing the event informs the TBI severity classification (ie, mild, moderate, severe). Several scales have been developed to define and grade the severity of TBI, most notably the Glasgow Coma Scale; however, loss of con-sciousness and PTA are the most common injury char-acteristics referenced in most classification systems.16 Additionally, PTA is commonly the primary and most specific diagnostic indicator of injury, and the extent of presenting PTA is often correlated with recovery (ie, shorter duration of PTA is correlated with better cogni-tive and functional outcome).15,17 This patient reported less than 24 hours of PTA, which would suggest a clas-

sification of mild traumatic brain injury and a relatively good prognosis for recovery following the incident.

• what factors aside from TBi might account for the fluctuations in this patient’s cognitive performance?

Fluctuations in cognitive performance are often due to situational variables such as mood disturbance and lifestyle factors. This patient reported feelings of frustration and depression, which can vary from day to day and exacerbate cognitive difficulties. Further, the patient reported significant trouble sleeping, which would also intensify difficulties with memory and think-ing and increase mood disturbance.

cASE � nEuroPSYcHoLogIcAL EvALuAtIon


measures to assess his current cognitive functioning and determine strengths and weaknesses that will aid in treatment planning. A summary of the patient’s performance for each test is provided in Table 2. The patient arrives late and reports significant anxiety about his difficulty finding the office and perseverates about this throughout the evaluation. When upset, his voice becomes loud and he leans in toward the examiner. He recognizes this at times and apologizes for inappropri-ate behavior. During testing, he often becomes visibly disappointed or frustrated when he perceives that he is not doing well. Given his full level of effort and motiva-tion, the test results are considered a valid indicator of his cognitive functioning.

The patient’s premorbid intellectual functioning is estimated to lie within the average range based on his educational and occupational attainment and other demographic variables, and this estimate is consistent with his performance on a test of oral word reading. Results of the evaluation indicate impairment across several domains. Attention and working memory are re-duced. Processing speed is intact for simple timed tasks but is reduced on more complex measures. Executive dysfunction is characterized by perseveration, cognitive inflexibility, and poor visuoconstructional planning and organization. The patient was asked to copy the Rey- Osterrieth Complex Figure (Figure, part A), and his di-rect copy is displayed in part B of the Figure. Set-shifting ability is impaired due to perseverative responding. Ad-ditionally, there is a minor reduction in phonemic as compared to semantic fluency. In contrast, abstract rea-soning is intact. An evaluation of verbal memory reveals intact new learning of information that is repeated over multiple trials, but new learning of lengthier narratives is

www.turner-white.com Neurology Volume 13, Part 4 7


reduced, which is thought to be due to difficulty attend-ing to the story. Retrieval is reduced but improved with cueing on yes/no recognition trials. Visual memory for the aforementioned complex figure is impaired after an immediate and long delay, which is attributed to his dif-ficulty planning and organizing during encoding. How-ever, as demonstrated in part C (immediate memory for the design) and part D (memory after a delay) of the Figure, the patient retains all of the information initially recalled over the delay and does not exhibit evidence of rapid forgetting. Intact recognition performance also suggests adequate retention over time. Language and visuospatial functioning are intact. Severe depression is endorsed. Despite these limitations, several strengths

are noted. Specifically, he is able to retain information over time and learn effectively when information is pre-sented in small amounts, repeated, and structured in ways that place low demands on executive functions of organization and planning.

cASE � rEcoMMEndAtIonS And concLuSIonS

In providing feedback to the patient, the neu-ropsychologist commends him for his efforts in

working with his therapist and psychiatrist to find helpful compensatory strategies and to combat depression. Re-garding recommendations, the patient is encouraged to continue this work, to participate in local support groups for head injury survivors, and to partake in pleasurable


A = average; B = borderline; HA = high average; I = impaired; LA = low average; S = superior.

D-KEFS = Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System; WAIS = Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale; WMS = Wechsler Memory Scale.

Domain/Test AdministeredResult/Percentile/

Classification

Premorbid functioningWechsler Test of Adult Reading18 Average


Similarities 25th, ADigit Symbol-Coding 2nd, IDigit Span Forward 12th, LADigit Span Backward 10th, LA

Clock drawingCommand Borderline impairedCopy Borderline impaired

D-KEFS19 subtestsTrail Making

Visual scanning 91st, SNumber sequencing 75th, HALetter sequencing 75th, HANumber-letter sequencing 2nd, IMotor speed 75th, HA

Verbal FluencyTotal letter (FAS) 9th, LATotal category 25th, ACategory switching total 37th, A

Color-Word InterferenceCondition

Color naming 47th, AWord reading 50th, AInhibition 5th, BInhibition/switching 9th, LA

Motor functioningFinger tapping

Dominant hand (R) 24th, LANon-dominant hand (L) 16th, LA

LanguageBoston Naming Test7 43rd, A


Classification

MemoryVerbal memory

WMS-III8 subtest:Logical Memory

Recall I 2nd, IRecall II 9th, LARecognition 37th, A

California Verbal Learning Test-II9

Word List Recall 3/8/7/8/12, 27th, A Short delay

Free 5 free, 16th, LACued 9 cued, 31st, A

Long delayFree 8 free, 31st, ACued 8 cued, 16th, LARecognition 11 hits/3 false positives

Visual memoryWMS-III Subtest

Visual reproductionRecall I 5th, BRecall II 2nd, IRecognition 37th, A

Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure10

Immediate recall 1st, IDelayed recall 1st, I

Visuoperceptual/visuospatial/ visuoconstructional functioning

WAIS-III subtestBlock Design 16th, LA

Rey-Osterrieth Complex FigureCopy < 1st, I

Hooper Visual Organization Test11 86th, HA

Emotional functioningBeck Depression Inventory20 Severe depression



activities outside of the home. The patient is also encour-aged to practice sleep hygiene (eg, maintain consistency in his hours of sleep each night; refrain from caffeine; ex-ercise, but not directly before bedtime) since his sleep dif-ficulties are likely exacerbating his cognitive difficulties. Additional recommendations provided to the patient and his providers include suggestions to help increase the effectiveness of his cognitive rehabilitation program by focusing on his strengths and using additional com-pensatory strategies, with the overall goal of returning to work at some level. First, the neuropsychologist suggests that he slow down when he attempts to complete a task, that he understand and accept that he may need more time to complete a task, and that he practice being more patient with himself. Ultimately, he will likely perform best at jobs that do not require speeded performance or multitasking. Second, results indicate that the patient performs best on over-learned, structured, simple, re-petitive tasks. As test results also indicate that the patient learns most effectively when provided with repetition and helpful prompts, his wife and care providers are advised to repeat information several times to help facilitate en-coding. While the patient displays trouble with retrieval of information, there is no indication of rapid forgetting; thus, he would be expected to retain this information

once it is effectively learned. Third, the patient appears to benefit from learning through modeling and receiv-ing positive feedback for his accomplishments. Fourth, friends, relatives, and providers are encouraged to pro-vide small amounts of information at a time so as not to overwhelm him and to reduce and simplify encoding demands. Similarly, it is suggested he would benefit from frequent breaks throughout the day to avoid becoming overtaxed.

cASE �: A ��-YEAr-oLd MAn WItH cognItIvE And BEHAvIorAL dIFFIcuLtIES


A 66-year-old right-handed man is referred for a neuropsychological evaluation by his neu-

rologist to assist with differential diagnosis and provide recommendations regarding possible treatments and interventions. The patient presents with a 1-year his-tory of gradually progressive cognitive and behavioral difficulties. While the patient generally denies difficul-ties with memory (“I’m not aware of any changes.”), he explains that he used to be “good at fixing things” but

B

A

C

D

Figure. The Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure (A) and the patient’s attempts to copy this figure, including a direct copy of the figure (B), a copy drawn after an immediate delay (C), and a copy drawn after a long delay (D). (Reprinted from Osterrieth PA. Le test de copie d’une figure complex: contribution a l’étude de la perception et de la mémoire. Archives de Psychologie. 1944;30:286–356.)



recently has had some difficulty “figuring things out.” For example, he was unable to successfully set up a recently purchased television. In contrast, the patient’s wife reports that he often asks repetitive questions and occasionally inquires as to the date. She also notes that his handwriting is significantly less legible and is char-acterized by misspellings and that he has considerable difficulty keeping track of appointments. The patient formerly managed the household finances; however, his wife took this over approximately 4 months prior to the evaluation because he was forgetting to make payments and was having trouble managing money and calculating change. The patient continues to man-age basic activities of daily living such as dressing and maintaining hygiene, although he is reportedly much slower to complete activities, sometimes stopping in the middle of carrying out an action.

The patient’s wife recounts a “bizarre” incident that occurred the week before the evaluation, in which the patient was unable to get up from the toilet, remaining there from roughly 11:30 pm until the next morning. His wife was unable to lift him and had no choice but to call 911. After being lifted from the seat, he reportedly walked without difficulty. The event was not attributed to any evident sensory or motor dysfunction and was thought to be associated with his significant apathy. He continues to drive locally, despite several minor accidents (he was not able to provide details, but his wife has found dents on the car) and his neurologist’s urging that he discontinue driving. Other changes in driving ability include incorrect signaling, failing to notice traffic signs, and stopping in traffic for no ap-parent reason. The patient’s wife also reports that her husband engages in odd repetitive behaviors such as rubbing his knees (to the point of rubbing holes in his pants), jingling his keys repeatedly, and running his thumb back and forth on the handle of a coffee cup. She describes a significant change in his appetite and eating habits, with the patient having gained 50 lb over the past year due to constantly craving sweets and junk food (cookies, doughnuts, pies), when he had previ-ously maintained a healthy diet. He also often plays with his food, “mashing it together.”

In regard to mood, the patient reports that it is “just fine.” In contrast, his wife notes that he is apathetic and that he spends the majority of his time in front of the television “just sitting and staring.” She describes him as more socially withdrawn and less conversational, with diminished interest and participation in activities he once enjoyed. She also states that he occasionally makes inappropriate comments and gestures in public

places, such as touching her inappropriately or making provocative comments to female store clerks, which she adds “just doesn’t seem like him.”

The neurologic examination is notable for reduced spontaneous speech, reduced verbal fluency, poor plan-ning when drawing a clock, inability to perform relatively simple working memory tasks, and significant impersis-tence throughout the motor exam. The examiner is also able to elicit positive snout and bilateral palmomental signs. Brain magnetic resonance imaging findings reveal marked cerebral volume loss, predominantly in the frontal and temporal regions. There is also asymmetric hippocampal formation volume loss, with loss on the right greater than on the left. There is no evidence of ventricular enlargement. The patient has experienced several episodes of incontinence over the 6 months prior to the evaluation. Additional medical history is unre-markable, with normal blood pressure and cholesterol level, no gait disturbance, and no history of head injury, substance abuse, or significant surgeries.

The patient completed the eleventh grade, leaving school because he noted he was “always better with [his] hands than anything else.” He went on to work as a welder for most of his life, until he retired at age 55 years. The patient reports no significant family his-tory of dementia and is the middle child with 2 siblings, one who died unexpectedly at age 52 years and another who is in good health at age 50 years. The patient notes that he had an “odd aunt” but is unable to provide details. He lives at home with his wife, eldest daughter, and her 2 sons. He has 5 children but is unable to provide their correct ages, and he reports having 17 grandchildren when there are actually 7.

• what are possible causes of this patient’s cognitive and behavioral problems?

Given the progressive nature of the patient’s diffi-culties, neurodegenerative disorders should be consid-ered, including frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and AD. Characteristics such as a progressive course, lack of insight, reported memory impairment (forgetting appointments and bills, asking repetitive questions), difficulty managing finances, and apathy suggest AD. However, these symptoms also may be present in FTD, and the patient’s young age, significant behavioral symptoms (including disinhibition and repetitive be-haviors), profound degree of apathy, and history of incontinence are more consistent with FTD. Despite the patient’s self report of mood being “just fine,” a psychiatric etiology also should be considered due to his apathy, anhedonia, and social withdrawal.

10 Hospital Physician Board Review Manual www.turner-white.com




measures. A summary of the patient’s performance for each test is provided in Table 3. The patient is pleasant and cooperative throughout testing, and although he is somewhat quiet and does not spontaneously initiate conversation, he responds to questions asked directly. Throughout the evaluation, he engages in perseverative motor behaviors, rubbing his thumb and index finger to-gether repeatedly and occasionally also rubbing his right pant leg. His presentation is also notable for difficulty ini-tiating and persisting with task behavior. For example, on

tasks in which he is provided with instructions and then expected to provide continuous responses (ie, measures of fluency, counting, and reading), he tends to provide one response and then stop, requiring direct prompting from the examiner before he continues. Additionally, a fire alarm sounds in the building during the evaluation, and although it is quite loud, he appears unaware of the disturbance. When the examiner accompanies him to the stairs to exit, he needs prompting to start descend-ing. The patient is generally appropriate throughout testing, but exhibits mild disinhibition, such as making 2 sexually provocative comments to the female examiner. Language is sparse but fluent, grammatically accurate,


A = average; B = borderline; I = impaired; LA = low average.

D-KEFS = Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System; WAIS = Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale; WMS = Wechsler Memory Scale.

*For informant report measures, higher percentiles indicate greater level of difficulty in these areas.


Classification

Mini-Mental State Examination2 22/30

Premorbid functioningNorth American Adult Reading Test21 Average


Similarities 9th, LADigit Symbol-Coding 5th, BDigit Span 9th, LALetter-Number Sequencing 1st, I

Clock DrawingCommand Borderline impairedCopy Borderline impaired

D-KEFS19 subtestsTrail Making

Visual scanning 16th, LANumber sequencing < 1st, ILetter sequencing < 1st, INumber-letter sequencing DiscontinuedMotor speed 25th, A

Verbal FluencyTotal letter (FAS) < 1st, ITotal category < 1st, ICategory switching total < 1st, I

LanguageBoston Naming Test7 5th, B

MemoryVerbal memory

WMS-III8 subtestLogical Memory

Recall I 5th, BRecall II 2nd, I% Retention 9th, LARecognition 37th, A


Classification

Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-R22

Total recall 3rd, BDelayed recall < 1st, I% Retention 16th, LARecognition 9th, LA

Free and cued selective reminding23 Free recall 17 points below cutoffFree and cued recall 2 points below cutoff

Visual memoryWMS-III subtest

Visual ReproductionRecall I 2nd, IRecall II 9th, LA% Retention 25th, ARecognition 2nd, B

Visuoperceptual/visuospatial/visuoconstructional functioning

WAIS-III subtestBlock Design 5th, B

Emotional functioningGeriatric depression scale12 5/30, within normal limitsFrontal Systems Behavior Scale24—

family rating form*Before

symptomsAfter

symptomsApathy 21st 99th Disinhibition 16th 96th Disinhibition executive 50th 99th Total 27th 99th

www.turner-white.com Neurology Volume 13, Part 4 11


and prosodic. Given the patient’s cooperative effort, the test results are considered a valid indicator of his func-tioning at that time.

Premorbid intellectual functioning is estimated to fall within the average range as indicated by a test of word reading in addition to demographic and occu-pational history. The results of the evaluation demon-strate impairment in executive functioning, visuocon-structional skills, and memory encoding and retrieval. Executive dysfunction is characterized by reduced psy-chomotor processing speed, impaired set shifting with errors of impulsivity and perseveration, and difficulty with initiation and task persistence. An evaluation of memory reveals frontally mediated impairment, specifically with the patient’s ability to encode and re-trieve information. His performance indicates that his retention of information is relatively more preserved; specifically, although he has difficulty freely recalling information, he is significantly aided by cueing and by yes/no recognition paradigms. Deficits are also seen within the visuoconstructional domain as he has trouble copying a complex figure and exhibits minor difficulty configuring patterned blocks. Confrontation naming is reduced. On an informant rating scale, his wife endorses significant mood disturbance (apathy), behavioral disinhibition, and dysexecutive symptoms, specifically, difficulty with problem solving.

• How does this cognitive profile inform the differen-tial diagnosis?

This cognitive profile is suggestive of significant deficits in frontal/executive functioning and frontally medi-ated memory and together with the provided history is most indicative of a behavioral variant of FTD. Differen-tiation between FTD and a neurodegenerative disorder such as AD is often difficult; however, careful review of behavioral history in concert with neuropsychological findings can aid in this delineation.

Behavioral symptoms associated with FTD include hyperorality, early loss of social awareness and insight, early signs of disinhibition, difficulties with initiation, and perseverative behaviors, often with insidious onset before the age of 70 years.25 This patient exhibited many of these behavioral symptoms in interview and during testing, including repetitive, perseverative motor behav-iors, disinhibition with little to no awareness, trouble with initiation, lack of insight into cognitive difficulties, and apathy. Behavioral symptoms of AD are numerous and may include the mentioned behaviors, especially apathy. However, in AD behavioral symptoms do not predominate, and although they can occur early in the disease course, they usually do not significantly inter-

fere with daily living until the later stages of the disease. In addition, the age of onset of difficulties in this pa-tient is typical of FTD, which has a mean age of onset of 62 years and is more common in younger patients.25

The patient’s neuropsychological findings are con-sistent with FTD as these patients frequently exhibit greater impairment on measures of executive function-ing (including measures of problem solving) than on memory measures, a pattern considered to be the op-posite of that encountered in AD.26 Also, patients with FTD benefit more from cueing and typically do not exhibit the rapid forgetting associated with AD.27

In summary, features most suggestive of FTD in this patient are the medical history (including incon-tinence), neuroimaging findings, age of onset, the progressive course of the illness, the history of change in personality with marked apathy, and the cognitive profile signifying frontal systems dysfunction. The pa-tient’s marked executive dysfunction, strategic memory disturbance, and initial symptoms of change in person-ality and behavior are not consistent with the pattern of deficits typical of AD.

Finally, although the patient exhibited some symp-toms of mood disturbance such as apathy and anhe-donia, he did not report depressed mood state, and his neuropsychological profile as well as behavioral changes were far more pronounced than would be expected in a case of cognitive dysfunction secondary to mood disorder.

cASE � rEcoMMEndAtIonS

First and foremost, the patient and his wife are educated about the diagnosis of FTD to help

them better understand symptoms of the illness at the present time and to help them prepare for the future as the disease progresses. Second, they are provided with in-depth information surrounding safety in and out of the home. For example, the patient is encouraged not to cook or operate dangerous welding equipment (as he had been a welder and still has this machinery). The installation of safeguards is suggested as he may ex-perience difficulties when alone and may have trouble calling for assistance. He is also encouraged to imme-diately cease driving, even locally, for his safety and the safety of others given his considerable difficulty with self-monitoring and his wife’s report of unsafe driving. The patient and his wife are also encouraged to keep him engaged in social and mental activities to the great-est extent possible, as withdrawal from activities is likely due not only to apathy but also to his trouble with initia-tion and task persistence. Additionally, compensatory strategies are reviewed with the patient and his wife,

1� Hospital Physician Board Review Manual www.turner-white.com


including providing cues to trigger memory, keeping lists to guide daily activities and routines, and maintain-ing an organized environment with items kept in the same place to enhance structure and cueing within the home. Last, a reevaluation is recommended in 1 year to monitor the patient’s cognitive functioning and modify recommendations as necessary.

cASE �: A �-YEAr-oLd gIrL WItH rEAdIng dIFFIcuLtY


A 9-year, 9-month-old right-handed 4th grade girl is referred for a neuropsychological evalua-

tion due to a 2-year history of reading difficulty first no-ticed by her mother and teachers. The evaluation was re-quested in order to assess the child’s cognitive strengths and weaknesses, to address questions pertaining to differential diagnosis, and to provide recommendations regarding possible educational services and interven-tions. The patient is accompanied by her mother, who provides much of the history. She has been attending the same private school since prekindergarten and since starting school has received teacher evaluations that con-sistently comment on her lack of confidence and signifi-cant anxiety. Her anxiety interferes with test taking and reading aloud during class. She is anxious about many things such as the weather (eg, if it is cloudy, she fears a storm), and she became fixated on fears of death and dying after 2 family friends unexpectedly died within the past 2 years and the patient was reportedly “unable to let it go.” She has a history of depression, and her mother mentions that the family “had some bad years” where they moved numerous times over a span of 4 years. It is also indicated that the patient often becomes fearful and sad if her mother is away for any period of time. She had been tutored 2 times per week the year prior to the evaluation, and the patient’s mother states that her daughter was particularly anxious on those days. At the time of the evaluation, the patient is no longer being tutored because of the stress and self-esteem issues she experienced surrounding tutoring the previous year (tutoring had been provided within the school environ-ment). The patient’s mother describes self-esteem as a major issue. For example, although the child is a won-derful athlete, her success in this arena does not seem to bolster her self-esteem. About twice a week, the patient experiences difficulty falling asleep due to thoughts sur-rounding death. Once she falls asleep, she is able to stay asleep, although she reportedly talks and walks in her

sleep occasionally. Appetite disturbance is denied. The patient sees a therapist, although her mother notes that she has not received feedback from the therapist for a while. In general, her mother feels that her daughter seems happy. Goals of the evaluation include determin-ing the patient’s level of academic achievement and the presence or absence of a learning disorder and assessing the impact of anxiety on cognitive functioning.

Medical history is unremarkable, with no hospitaliza-tions, significant illness, or head injury. The patient’s mother describes her pregnancy as relatively normal. The patient was delivered vaginally, and the cord was wrapped around her neck at birth, although there were no associated or further complications. The patient’s mother describes her as having been a “tough” baby, with trouble with sleep and as “extremely defiant,” describing incidents in which she had pulled down her dresser and threw everything out of her room. Her mother cannot remember when this ended but states that the patient is now much more agreeable. However, there are times when she continues to refuse to cooper-ate (eg, the summer prior to the evaluation, she refused to cooperate with a reading tutor).

The patient’s mother describes significant family stressors that were especially salient when the patient was a baby. At that time, she was going through a di-vorce with her husband, who struggled with addiction, mental health problems, and learning disabilities. The patient currently lives with her mother, older brother, and stepfather, with whom she has a good relationship. At the time of the evaluation, she has not seen her bio-logical father in over 2 years. Aside from the biological father’s learning disabilities, reportedly dyslexia, there is no other family history of learning disorders, and her older brother is doing well in school.

Regarding educational history, the patient report-edly did well in preschool, where she was very social, kind, and inquisitive. She has no attentional or behav-ior issues, and has no difficulty making friends. Her mother states that the patient struggles when she reads aloud and describes her reading as nonfluent. She also states that the patient never picks up a book on her own to read. It is noted that the patient continues to spell phonetically. The patient enjoys school, where math is her favorite subject. However, she struggles to work independently and receives poor grades for effort other than in gym class. Completing homework is prob-lematic, and within the past year she has become very anxious about it, telling her mother, “I can’t do this.”

• what are the possible causes of this patient’s reading difficulty?

www.turner-white.com Neurology Volume 13, Part 4 1�


Given the patient’s difficulty reading, significant fear of tutoring surrounding reading and reading aloud, continued phonetic spelling, and family history of learn-ing disorders, a developmental learning disorder is con-sidered as a primary etiology, specifically developmental dyslexia. Additionally, given her history of anxiety, de-pression, and low self-esteem, difficulties secondary to mood are also a consideration.



measures to assess functioning. A summary of the pa-tient’s performance for each test is provided in Table 4. During the evaluation, the patient initially presents as somewhat lethargic and disinterested in testing, although this seems to be due to a lack of confidence and reticence on her part to be tested. Given her reluc-tance, her mother is invited to join her in the testing room, and the patient seems to feel more comfortable with her there. Following lunch, the patient’s affect is significantly brighter, and her confidence and level of cooperation appear to be greatly improved. She is tested without her mother present and appears to be much more comfortable and fully engaged in testing. However, the patient’s confidence significantly varies by type of test. She is far more interested and engaged in tasks that involve visuospatial (rather than verbal) pro-cessing. Also, on academic testing, her confidence level and demeanor differ significantly between math and reading measures. In general, her presentation suggests that her confidence level significantly affects her ability to fully engage and exert effort. This factor is taken into consideration when interpreting the test results. While the patient is able to sustain attention for the evaluation, behavioral presentation is notable for some motor rest-lessness as she frequently slides down in her chair and needs reminders to sit up.

Evaluation results indicate that the patient has aver-age to high average intellectual functioning. Cognitive skills are relatively evenly developed, with a relative strength in processing speed. In contrast, testing in the domain of academic achievement provides evidence of a less consistent pattern. While the patient exhibits a considerable strength in math skills, particularly in her conceptual understanding, she exhibits a relative weakness in her reading skills, with difficulties evident in her word reading, fluency, and an inconsistency in her reading comprehension. On measures administered to assess functioning within individual cognitive domains, she exhibits a relative strength in attention and execu-tive functioning, although difficulties are evident when

the information is unstructured or complex. For exam-ple, on a verbal list learning task and a task in which she is asked to copy a complex figure, she fails to structure the information on her own, which would have made it easier to learn. She also exhibits a mild weakness in visuomotor integration, evident in her copy of a complex figure and in her copy of simpler geometric figures. Finally, both her presentation and her mother and teacher’s report on behavior checklists indicate significant problems with anxiety. The patient’s anxiety is evident in both home and school environments and appears to significantly impact her confidence as well as her self-esteem. This is evident in testing, where her difficulties with reading appear to be compounded by her low level of confidence in her abilities within this domain. The patient’s teacher also endorses a number of significant difficulties with executive functioning, which appear to be more evident in the more complex and demanding school environment than at home. Her teacher’s responses indicate that she has significant diffi-culties with working memory, planning and organizing, and organization of materials, and has milder difficul-ties initiating and monitoring her behavior on tasks.

• How does the patient’s cognitive profile inform the differential diagnosis?

These findings support a diagnosis of developmental dyslexia, with the patient’s reading skills falling signifi-cantly below expectations based on her level of intellec-tual functioning and grade placement. Moreover, the nature of her difficulties, characterized by a weakness in phonologic decoding, is consistent with the core deficit in developmental dyslexia. These difficulties impact the patient’s fluency as well as her reading comprehension and also appear to impact and to be impacted by her anxiety. That is, the patient’s anxiety exacerbates her reading difficulties, and her reading difficulties foster her lack of confidence and her level of anxiety within the school environment. The patient’s anxiety, while clearly impacted by her learning difficulties, extends beyond this, with specific phobias and obsessions as well as a generalized lack of self-confidence.

cASE � rEcoMMEndAtIonS

Recommendations provided to the patient, her mother, and teachers first and foremost

highlight the importance of tutoring directed at im-proving her weak reading skills. The neuropsychologist suggests that tutoring be provided to the patient 2 times per week and that it be based on a direct, phonologic, multisensory, and sequential method in order to ad-dress her specific underlying phonologic weakness. It



is considered crucial that her reading difficulties be addressed, as reading is fundamental to learning and achievement in all academic domains. The delivery of these services is considered in light of her low self- esteem, particularly within the school environment, and it is recommended that tutoring be provided out-side of school. It is also recommended that the patient be given an opportunity to meet with the tutor to get to know and feel comfortable with him/her prior to ini-tiation of tutoring. Also, given the patient’s difficulties

with aspects of executive functioning (specifically, her difficulties structuring complex information), tutoring is recommended to help her learn strategies to break down information into smaller and more meaningful units. It is suggested that tutoring in both of these do-mains be administered by the same individual, as this would help the patient learn how to utilize effective strategies for structuring information both when read-ing as well as when performing other cognitive tasks. Contact information for tutors in her area is provided.

Table 4. (continued)

Domain/Test Administered Percentile Classification

Memory (continued))Semantic clustering (ratio) 6 BorderlineSerial clustering (ratio) 50 AverageRecognition discriminability 68 Average

Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure TestImmediate recall < 1 ImpairedDelayed recall < 1 Impaired

Emotional and behavioral functioning

BRIEF35—parent*Inhibit 42Shift 93Emotional control 70Initiate 85Working memory 83Plan/organize 90Organization of materials 62Monitor 56

BRIEF—teacher* Inhibit 65Shift 90Emotional control 80Initiate 95Working memory 99Plan/organize 99Organization of materials 99Monitor 95

BASC-236—parent*Externalizing problems 25Internalizing problems 86Behavioral symptoms index 54Adaptive skills 13Anxiety 97

BASC-2—teacher*Externalizing problems 22Internalizing problems 98School problems 81Behavioral symptoms index 46Adaptive skills 20Anxiety 99


BASC = Behavior Assessment System for Children; BRIEF = Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function; D-KEFS = Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System.



Intellectual abilityWechsler Intelligence Scale for

Children-IV28 Verbal comprehension 66 AveragePerceptual reasoning 50 AverageWorking memory 34 AverageProcessing speed 84 High averageFull scale IQ 63 AverageVerbal comprehension subtests

Similarities 84 High averageVocabulary 50 AverageInformation 63 Average

Perceptual reasoning subtestsBlock Design 37 AveragePicture Concepts 75 High averageMatrix Reasoning 37 Average

Working memory subtestsDigit Span 37 AverageLetter-Number Sequencing 37 Average

Processing speed subtestsCoding 75 High averageSymbol Search 84 High average

Academic achievementGray Oral Reading Test-429

Rate 37 AverageAccuracy 25 AverageFluency 25 AverageComprehension 63 AverageQuotient 42 Average

Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-II30

Word reading 21 Low averageReading comprehension 50 AveragePseudoword decoding 50 AverageNumerical operations 77 High averageMath reasoning 99 SuperiorSpelling 53 AverageWritten expression 45 AverageReading 32 AverageMathematics 97 SuperiorWritten language 45 Average


Attention/executive functionsD-KEFS6 subtests

Trail Making TestVisual scanning 91 SuperiorNumber sequencing 91 SuperiorLetter sequencing 91 SuperiorNumber-letter switching 95 SuperiorMotor speed 84 High average

Verbal FluencyTotal letter 75 High averageTotal category 99 Very superiorCategory switching total 84 High averageCategory switching accuracy 84 High averageTotal set-loss errors 50 AverageTotal repetition errors 50 Average

Design FluencyFilled dots 97 SuperiorEmpty dots 75 High averageSwitching 37 AverageTotal set-loss 25 AverageTotal repeated 37 Average

LanguageExpressive Vocabulary Test-231 66 AveragePeabody Picture Vocabulary Test-432 73 AverageVisuoperceptual/visuospatial/

visuoconstructional functioning Developmental Test of Visual Motor

Integration-53318 Low average

Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test10

Copy < 1 ImpairedMemoryCalifornia Verbal Learning Test—

children’s version34

List A trials 1–5 total 66 AverageList A trial 1 68 AverageList A trial 5 68 AverageLearning Slope List A Trials 1–5 68 AverageList A short delay free recall 93 SuperiorList A short delay cued recall 68 AverageList A long delay free recall 68 AverageList A long delay cued recall 93 Superior

www.turner-white.com Neurology Volume 13, Part 4 1�


Recommendations for the patient’s classroom are also provided. Specifically, it is proposed that teach-ers ensure that she comprehends directions, help her brainstorm ideas to improve task initiation, break down assignments into smaller units, allow more time on tests, and provide her with strategies to improve organization and homework completion. Continued psychotherapy is encouraged given the patient’s mood symptoms, and it is recommended that the patient’s mother meet with the therapist to determine strategies that can be used

at home to help the patient manage her anxiety as well as to update the therapist in terms of the patient’s cur-rent difficulties at home and school. Additionally, given the patient’s significant anxiety and phobias that were interfering with her sleep, her schoolwork and her self-esteem, a psychiatric consultation is recommended to determine whether any further treatment is necessary.

SuMMArY

The cases presented in this manual cover a range of disorders typical of those encountered in patients referred for neuropsychological evaluation. The descrip-tions of these clinical cases along with the neuropsycho-logical findings provide an in-depth review of essential concepts in neuropsychology and illustrate how infor-mation gathered from neuropsychological evaluations can benefit patients’ clinical care. For each of the cases, the neuropsychological tests administered as well as the neuropsychological case conceptualization were tailored to address the specific goals outlined by the patient, their family, and the referring providers. The goals ad-dressed included assessment of the patient’s cognitive status across a range of domains to determine areas of cognitive strength and weakness, assistance in addressing questions pertaining to differential diagnosis, monitor-ing of a patient’s cognitive status over time through re-peat neuropsychological evaluations, and/or providing recommendations regarding possible treatments and in-terventions that could benefit patients and their families. The goals were accomplished using both qualitative and quantitative data gathered through behavioral observa-tion and the administration of standardized tests.

BoArd rEvIEW QuEStIonS

Test your knowledge of this topic. go to www.turner-white.com and select Neurology from

the drop-down menu of specialties.

rEFErEncES

1. Stern Y, Zarahn E, Habeck C, et al. A common neural network for cognitive reserve in verbal and object working memory in young but not old. Cereb Cortex 2008;18:959–67.

2. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state.” A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975;12:189–98.

3. Jastak J, Wilkenson G. Wide Range Achievement Test—third edition (WRAT-3). Wilmington (DE): Wide Range, Inc.; 1993.

4. Wechsler D. Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. 3rd ed. San Antonio (TX): Psychological Corporation; 1997.

Table 4. (continued)


Memory (continued))Semantic clustering (ratio) 6 BorderlineSerial clustering (ratio) 50 AverageRecognition discriminability 68 Average

Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure TestImmediate recall < 1 ImpairedDelayed recall < 1 Impaired

Emotional and behavioral functioning

BRIEF35—parent*Inhibit 42Shift 93Emotional control 70Initiate 85Working memory 83Plan/organize 90Organization of materials 62Monitor 56

BRIEF—teacher* Inhibit 65Shift 90Emotional control 80Initiate 95Working memory 99Plan/organize 99Organization of materials 99Monitor 95

BASC-236—parent*Externalizing problems 25Internalizing problems 86Behavioral symptoms index 54Adaptive skills 13Anxiety 97

BASC-2—teacher*Externalizing problems 22Internalizing problems 98School problems 81Behavioral symptoms index 46Adaptive skills 20Anxiety 99


BASC = Behavior Assessment System for Children; BRIEF = Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function; D-KEFS = Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System.



Intellectual abilityWechsler Intelligence Scale for

Children-IV28 Verbal comprehension 66 AveragePerceptual reasoning 50 AverageWorking memory 34 AverageProcessing speed 84 High averageFull scale IQ 63 AverageVerbal comprehension subtests

Similarities 84 High averageVocabulary 50 AverageInformation 63 Average

Perceptual reasoning subtestsBlock Design 37 AveragePicture Concepts 75 High averageMatrix Reasoning 37 Average

Working memory subtestsDigit Span 37 AverageLetter-Number Sequencing 37 Average

Processing speed subtestsCoding 75 High averageSymbol Search 84 High average

Academic achievementGray Oral Reading Test-429

Rate 37 AverageAccuracy 25 AverageFluency 25 AverageComprehension 63 AverageQuotient 42 Average

Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-II30

Word reading 21 Low averageReading comprehension 50 AveragePseudoword decoding 50 AverageNumerical operations 77 High averageMath reasoning 99 SuperiorSpelling 53 AverageWritten expression 45 AverageReading 32 AverageMathematics 97 SuperiorWritten language 45 Average


Attention/executive functionsD-KEFS6 subtests

Trail Making TestVisual scanning 91 SuperiorNumber sequencing 91 SuperiorLetter sequencing 91 SuperiorNumber-letter switching 95 SuperiorMotor speed 84 High average

Verbal FluencyTotal letter 75 High averageTotal category 99 Very superiorCategory switching total 84 High averageCategory switching accuracy 84 High averageTotal set-loss errors 50 AverageTotal repetition errors 50 Average

Design FluencyFilled dots 97 SuperiorEmpty dots 75 High averageSwitching 37 AverageTotal set-loss 25 AverageTotal repeated 37 Average

LanguageExpressive Vocabulary Test-231 66 AveragePeabody Picture Vocabulary Test-432 73 AverageVisuoperceptual/visuospatial/

visuoconstructional functioning Developmental Test of Visual Motor

Integration-53318 Low average

Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test10

Copy < 1 ImpairedMemoryCalifornia Verbal Learning Test—

children’s version34

List A trials 1–5 total 66 AverageList A trial 1 68 AverageList A trial 5 68 AverageLearning Slope List A Trials 1–5 68 AverageList A short delay free recall 93 SuperiorList A short delay cued recall 68 AverageList A long delay free recall 68 AverageList A long delay cued recall 93 Superior



5. Benton AL, Hamsher K. Multilingual Aphasia Examination. 2nd ed. Iowa City (IA): AJA Associates; 1989.

6. Reitan RM. The Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery: theory and clinical interpretation. 2nd ed. Tucson (AZ): Neuropsychology Press; 1993:912.

7. Goodglass H, Kaplan E. Boston Naming Test. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2000.

8. Wechsler D. Wechsler Memory Scale. 3rd ed. San Antonio (TX): Psychologi-cal Corporation; 1997.

9. Delis DC, Kramer JH, Kaplan E, Ober B. California Verbal Learning Test. 2nd ed. San Antonio (TX): Psychological Corporation; 2000.

10. Osterrieth PA. Le test de copie d’une figure complex: contribution a l’étude de la perception et de la mémoire. Archives de Psychologie 1944;30:286–356.

11. Hooper HE. Hooper Visual Organization Test Manual. Los Angeles (CA): Western Psychological Services; 1983.

12. Brink TL, Yesavage JA, Lum O, et al. Screening tests for geriatric depression. Clin Gerontol 1982;1:37–43.

13. Rosser A, Hodges JR. Initial letter and semantic category fluency in Alzheim-er’s disease, Huntington’s disease, and progressive supranuclear palsy. J Neu-rol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994;57:1389–94.

14. Atri A, Shaughnessy LW, Locascio JJ, Growdon JH. Long-term course and ef-fectiveness of combination therapy in Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 2008;22:209–21.

15. Ruff RM, Iverson GL, Barth JT, et al. Recommendations for diagnosing a mild traumatic brain injury: a National Academy of Neuropsychology education paper. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2009;24:3–10.

16. McCrea MA. Mild traumatic brain injury and postconcussion syndrome: the new evidence base for diagnosis and treatment. New York (NY): Oxford Uni-versity Press; 2008.

17. de Guise E, Leblanc J, Feyz M, Lamoureux J. Prediction of the level of cogni-tive functional independence in acute care following traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj 2005;19:1087–93.

18. Wechsler D. WTAR: Wechsler Test of Adult Reading manual. San Antonio (TX): Psychological Corporation; 2001.

19. Delis DC, Kaplan E, Kramer JH. Delis-Kaplan executive function system. San Antonio (TX): Psychological Corporation; 2001.

20. Beck AT, Steer RA, Brown GK. Beck Depression Inventory: manual. 2nd ed.

San Antonio (TX): Psychological Corp.; 1996.21. Blair JR, Spreen O. Predicting premorbid IQ: a revision of the national adult

reading test. Clin Neuropsychol 1989;3:129–36.22. Brandt J, Benedict RH. Hopkins Verbal Learning Test—revised. Lutz (FL):

Psychological Assessment Resources; 2001.23. Grober E, Lipton RB, Hall C, Crystal H. Memory impairment on free and

cued selective reminding predicts dementia. Neurology 2000;54:827–32.24. Grace J, Malloy PF. Frontal systems behavior scale: professional manual. Lutz

(FL): Psychological Assessment Resources; 2001.25. Grossman M. Frontotemporal dementia: a review. J Int Neuropsychol Soc

2002;8:566–83.26. Pachana NA, Boone KB, Miller BL, et al. Comparison of neuropsychological

functioning in Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia. J Int Neu-ropsychol Soc 1996;2:505–10.

27. Pasquier F, Grymonprez L, Lebert F, Van der Linden M. Memory impair-ment differs in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Neurocase 2001;7:161–71.

28. Wechsler D. WISC-IV administration and scoring manual. San Antonio (TX): Psychological Corporation; 2003.

29. Wiederholt JL, Bryant BR. Gray oral reading tests. 4th ed. Austin (TX): Pro-Ed; 2001.

30. WIAT: Wechsler Individual Achievement Test: manual. 2nd ed. San Antonio (TX): The Psychological Corporation; 2002.

31. Williams KT. AGS expressive vocabulary test manual. 2nd ed. Circle Pines (MN): American Guidence Service; 2007.

32. Dunn LM, Dunn DD. Examiner’s manual for the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. 4th ed. Circle Pines (MN): American Guidance Service; 2007.

33. Beery KE, Buktenica NA, Beery NA. Developmental test of visual-motor inte-gration (VMI): manual. 5th ed. Cleveland (OH): Modern Curriculum Press; 2004.

34. Delis DC, Kramer JH, Kaplan E, Ober B. The California Verbal Learning Test—children’s version. San Antonio (TX): The Psychological Corporation; 1994.

35. Gioia GA, Isquith PK, Guy SC, Kenworthy L. Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function: professional manual. Odessa (FL): Psychological Assess-ment Resources; 2000.

36. Reynolds CR, Kamphaus RW. Behavior assessment system for children (BASC-2). 2nd ed. Circle Pines (MN): American Guidance Service; 2004.

Copyright 2009 by Turner White Communications Inc., Wayne, PA. All rights reserved.

Documents

NeuROLOGY BOARD ReVIew MANuAL … · The Hospital Physician Neurology Board Review Manual is a peer-reviewed study guide for ... The patient reports experiencing “short-term