Cognitive Assessments for Patients With Neurological Conditions: A Preliminary Survey of Speech-Language Pathology Practice Patterns

Abstract

Purpose Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are often responsible for assessing cognitive disorders that affect communication for individuals with diagnosed or suspected acute or degenerative neurological conditions. However, consensus on appropriate assessment tools for various neurological disorders remains elusive. This preliminary survey was conducted to study current practices in the use of published and unpublished tools by SLPs when assessing cognitive-communication impairments across common neurologic conditions. Method An 18-item web-based survey was sent to SLPs through ASHA Communities and social media, asking them to select which cognitive assessment tools they use to evaluate the cognitive-communication status of individuals with Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, dementia, stroke (i.e., cerebrovascular accident), and traumatic brain injury. The 100 SLPs who completed the online survey represent a spectrum of professionals seeing neurologic patients across the United States. Results Among the 100 responding SLPs, no unique pattern of assessment tool use was noted across neurologic disorders as indicated by a chi-square analysis. A common set of nonstandardized and observational assessment practices was reported most commonly, regardless of the neurologic condition. Conclusions This study shows consistent cognitive assessment practices by SLPs across various neurological conditions rather than unique protocols relevant to the patterns typical across disorders. However, the amount of clinical evaluations supported by informal observation and/or the completion of select subtests of standardized assessment tools is considerable. This preliminary information conflicts with principles of rigorous assessment and increases the risk of erroneous findings when identifying cognitive impairments. Further research into the decision-making process of clinician assessment selection is warranted to encourage consistent, evidence-based practice for persons with cognitive impairments. Better recognition of the limitations imposed by providing clinical services that impact the reliability and validity of cognitive assessments can drive future clinical practice policy and practice recommendations.