Article Text

PDF
Neuropsychological testing
  1. Chiara Zucchella1,
  2. Angela Federico1,2,
  3. Alice Martini3,
  4. Michele Tinazzi1,2,
  5. Michelangelo Bartolo4,
  6. Stefano Tamburin1,2
  1. 1 Neurology Unit, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
  2. 2 Department of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
  3. 3 School of Psychology, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
  4. 4 Department of Rehabilitation, Neurorehabilitation Unit, Habilita, Zingonia, Italy
  1. Correspondence to Prof. Stefano Tamburin, Department of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona I-37134, Italy; stefano.tamburin{at}univr.it

Abstract

Neuropsychological testing is a key diagnostic tool for assessing people with dementia and mild cognitive impairment, but can also help in other neurological conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, stroke, multiple sclerosis, traumatic brain injury and epilepsy. While cognitive screening tests offer gross information, detailed neuropsychological evaluation can provide data on different cognitive domains (visuospatial function, memory, attention, executive function, language and praxis) as well as neuropsychiatric and behavioural features. We should regard neuropsychological testing as an extension of the neurological examination applied to higher order cortical function, since each cognitive domain has an anatomical substrate. Ideally, neurologists should discuss the indications and results of neuropsychological assessment with a clinical neuropsychologist. This paper summarises the rationale, indications, main features, most common tests and pitfalls in neuropsychological evaluation.

  • dementia
  • cognitive neuropsychology
  • alzheimer-s disease
  • neuropsychology
  • cognition

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors CZ, AF, AM and ST: designed the article, collected and interpreted the data, drafted the manuscript and revised it. MT and MB: designed the article, collected and interpreted the data, and revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. CZ and ST: take full responsibility for the content of this review. All authors approved the final version of the article.

  • Funding This research received no specific grant from anyfunding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed. This paper was reviewed by Nick Fox, London, UK.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.