Assessment of neurocognitive function after cardiac arrest

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Impaired neurocognitive function is common in cardiac arrest survivors and the use of specific neurocognitive assessments are recommended in both clinical trials and daily practice. This review examines the most recent evidence to guide in the selection of neurocognitive outcome assessment tools after cardiac arrest. RECENT FINDINGS: Neurocognitive impairment after cardiac arrest was recently reported as one of the major predictors for societal participation, highlighting the need for neurocognitive assessments. A subjective report is a simple method to screen for cognitive problems, but divergent findings were reported when comparing with objective measures. A standardized observer report may be useful for cognitive screening postcardiac arrest. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was recommended for cognitive screening after cardiac arrest. Detailed neurocognitive assessments were reported as valuable for in-depth evaluation of patients in interventional studies. The best time-point for neurocognitive assessments remains unknown. Recent findings report that most neurocognitive recovery is seen within the first months after cardiac arrest, with some improvement also noted between 3 and 12 months postcardiac arrest. SUMMARY: Neurocognitive assessments after cardiac arrest are important and the approach should differ depending on the clinical situation. Large, prospective, well designed studies, to guide the selection of neurocognitive assessments after cardiac arrest, are urgently needed.

Details

Authors
Organisations
External organisations
  • Skåne University Hospital
Research areas and keywords

Subject classification (UKÄ) – MANDATORY

  • Anesthesiology and Intensive Care
  • Neurology
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)234-239
Number of pages6
JournalCurrent Opinion in Critical Care
Volume25
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 2019
Publication categoryResearch
Peer-reviewedYes