Comparison of Neuropsychological Assessment by Videoconference and Face to Face

Objective: To compare the administration of neuropsychological tests by teleneuropsychology (TeleNP) and face to face (F-F) in order to determine the feasibility and reliability of TeleNP. Method: At the inclusion visit, all participants underwent a traditional F-F neuropsychological assessment as part of their standard care. Four months after inclusion, they were randomized to undergo an additional neuropsychological assessment either by F-F administration or by TeleNP. Results: A total of 150 adults with cognitive complaints, but with no major cognitive or sensorial impairment were included. At 4 months, 69 participants were randomized in the F-F arm and 71 in TeleNP arm (10 lost in the follow-up). The overall satisfaction was high: 87.1% in the TeleNP arm were "very satisfied", and 82.9% indicated no preference between F-F and TeleNP. In agreement with previous data from the literature, neuropsychological assessments gave similar results across both administration conditions for a large majority of tests [Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (FCSRT) French version, Mahieux gestural praxis battery, Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB), time of completion of the Trail making Test (TMT) A and B, number of errors of the TMT B, Rey complex figure test, categorical et phonological verbal fluency tests] and minor differences for others [80-picture naming test (DO-80), FAB, Digit Span forward and backward and number of errors in the TMT A]. Conclusions: TeleNP is a promising method to be able to test patients as an alternative to F-F condition. Before this procedure can be generalized, it is now necessary to standardize the adaptation of certain tests and to test them in populations with more significant cognitive disorders.