The Clinical Value Of The Evaluation Part Of The Cognitive Evaluation And Rehabilitation System ZM3.1

Objective1. To get the normative data about the cognitive functioning of 100 normal Chinese adults with the Evaluation Part of the Cognitive Evaluation and Rehabilitation System ZM3.1, and to find out the factors affecting the participant's scores.2. To test the stability and validity of the Evaluation Part of the Cognitive Evaluation and Rehabilitation System ZM3.1.Methods1. One hundred normal Chinese adults were examined with MMSE and the Evaluation Part of the Cognitive Evaluation and Rehabilitation System ZM3.1. Through analyzing the variance of educational levels, ages, occupation, gender, handedness, we found out the factors that influence the participant's scores of the Evaluation Part and it's functional items.2. There were eighty cognitive impairment patients in the case group. The patients were selected with MMSE from cases of brain injury. Then the eighty cognitive impairment patients were examined with the Evaluation Part of the Cognitive Evaluation and Rehabilitation System ZM3.1.3. One week after the first test, 17 cases as group A selected from the cognitive impairment patients were tested again with the Evaluation Part of the Cognitive Evaluation and Rehabilitation System ZM3.1 by the same investigator, and the other 15 cases as group B were retested by another investigator.Results1. The scores of the Evaluation Part of the Cognitive Evaluation andRehabilitation System ZM3.1 were affected by the participant's educational level, age and occupation.2. The Evaluation Part of the Cognitive Evaluation and Rehabilitation System ZM3.1 had satisfying reliability, most functional subitems had Cronbach a coefficients over 0.85 and there was no significant difference between test and retest either group A or group B (.P>0.05).3. The Evaluation Part of the Cognitive Evaluation and Rehabilitation System ZM3.1 had satisfying availability: Firstly, the correlation between the total scores of the Evaluation Part and MMSE of 80 cognitive impairment patients was 0.818(P < 0.01). Secondly, taking MMSE as "gold standard", the sensitivity and specificity of the Evaluation Part were 97.5% and 90% respectively. Thirdly, the Evaluation Part was good at differentiating the levels of damage severity among the three groups of cognitive impairment patients.Conclusions1. When using the Evaluation Part of the Cognitive Evaluation and Rehabilitation System ZM3.1 to test people, we should consider individual educational level, age and occupation.2. The Evaluation Part of the Cognitive Evaluation and Rehabilitation System ZM3.1 has good stability and validity and is a good tool to evaluate cognitive abilities.