Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T21:27:35.616Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Frontal Behavioral Inventory: Diagnostic Criteria for Frontal Lobe Dementi

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

Andrew Kertesz ,
Wilda Davidson  and
Hannah Fox
Andrew Kertesz*
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, St. Joseph's Health Centre, University of Western Ontario, London.
Wilda Davidson
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, St. Joseph's Health Centre, University of Western Ontario, London.
Hannah Fox
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, St. Joseph's Health Centre, University of Western Ontario, London.
*
Division of Neurology, St. Joseph's Health Centre, 268 Grosvenor Street, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 4V2
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

To utilize the diagnostic criteria of frontal lobe dementia (FLD).

Methods:

We studied 12 patients with FLD diagnosed clinically, with radiological confirmation in 10 and autopsy confirmation in 2; sixteen patients with Alzheimer's disease matched for stage and severity to FLD and 11 patients with depressive dementia were used as control groups. A 24-item Frontal Behavioral Inventory (FBI) using the most relevant behavioral manifestations of FLD was administered in these populations.

Results:

FLD patient scores on the FBI were much higher compared with control groups (AD and DD). Item analysis showed loss of insight, indifference, distractibility, personal neglect and apathy as the most frequent negative symptoms. Perseveration, disinhibition, inappropriateness, impulsivity, and irresponsibility were the most significant positive symptoms. An operational definition of FLD included a minimum FBI score of 27. Only one false positive was shown in the depressive group and none among the AD group, indicating little overlap between patient groups, and a high discriminating value of the FBI.

Conclusions:

The FBI appears to be a useful diagnostic instrument and a method to operate the behavioral criteria of FLD. Further prospective studies are warranted to establish validity.

Résumé:

RÉSUMÉ:Objectif:

De rendre opérationnels les critères diagnostiques de la démence frontale (DF).

Méthodes:

Nous avons étudié 12 patients atteints de DF diagnostiquée cliniquement, avec confirmation radiologique du diagnostic chez 10 et autopsique chez 2; 16 patients atteints de la maladie d'Alzheimer (MA) appariés pour le stade et la sévérité de la DF et 11 patients atteints d'une démence dépressive (DD) ont servi de contrôles. Une grille d'évaluation du comportement frontal (ÉCF) comportant 24 items ciblant les manifestations du comportement les plus pertinentes a la DF à été administrée à ces patients.

Résultats:

Les scores des patients atteints de DF à l'ÉCF étaient beaucoup plus élevés comparés à ceux des groupes contrôles (MA et DD). L'analyse par item a monté' une perte de la capacité d'introspection, de l'indifférence, de la distractivité, de la négligence de leur personne et de l'apathie comme symptômes négatifs les plus fréquents. La persévération, la désinhibition, l'inopportunité, l'impulsivité et l'irresponsabilité étaient les symptômes positifs les plus significatifs. Une définition opérationelle de la DF incluait un score minimun de 27 à l'ÉCF. On a constaté un seul faux positif dans le groupe DD et aucun dans le groupe MA, ce qui indique qu'il y a peu de chevauchement entre les groupes de patients et que la valeur discriminante de l'ÉCF est élévee.

Conclusions:

L'ÉCF semble être un outil diagnostique utile et une méthode pour rendre opérationnels les critères comportementaux de la DF. Des études prospectives sont justifiées pour en établir la validité.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , February 1997 , pp. 29 - 36
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Neurological Sciences Federation 1997

References

REFERENCES

1. Neary, D, Snowden, JS, Northen, B, Goulding, PF Dementia of frontal lobe type. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1988; 51: 353–361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Gustafson, L, Brun, A, Risberg, J. Frontal lobe dementia of non- Alzheimer type. In: Wurtman, RJ, Corkin, S, Growdon, J, Ritter- Walker, E eds. Alzheimer’s disease. Advances in Neurology, Vol 51. New York: Raven Press, 1990; 51: 65–71.Google Scholar
3. Snowden, JS, Neary, D, Mann, MA et al. Progressive language disorder due to lobar atrophy. Ann Neurol 1992; 31: 174–183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Kertesz, A, Hudson, L., Mackenzie, IRA., Munoz, DG. The pathology and nosology of Primary Progressive Aphasia. Neurology 1994;44:2065–2072.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Neary, D, Snowden, JS, Mann, DMA et al. Frontal lobe dementia and motor neurone disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1990; 53: 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Caselli, RJ, Windebank, AJ, Petersen, RC, et al. Rapidly progressive aphasic dementia and motor neuron disease. Ann Neurol 1993; 33: 200–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Rebeiz, JJ, Kolodny, EH, Richardson, EP Corticodentatonigral degeneration with neuronal achromasia. Arch Neurol 1968; 18: 20–33.Google Scholar
8. Riley, DE, Lang, AE, Lewis, A, et al. Cortical-basal ganglionic degeneration. Neurology 1990; 40: 1203–1212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Riley, DE The Lund and Manchester Groups. Clinical and neuropathological criteria for frontotemporal dementia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994;57:416–418.Google Scholar
10. Karbe, H, Kertesz, A, Polk, M Profiles of language impairment in primary progressive aphasia. Arch Neurol 1993; 50: 193–201.Google Scholar
11. Kertesz, A Focal atrophies: primary progressive aphasia, frontal lobe dementia and the Pick complex. In : Fazekas, F, Schmidt, R, Alavi, A, eds. Neuroimaging of Normal Aging and Uncommon Causes of Dementia. The Netherlands: ICG Publications, 1995 (In press).Google Scholar
12. Shader, RI, Harmatz, JS, Salzman, C A new scale for clinical assessment in geriatric populations: Sandoz Clinical Assessment Geriatric (SCAG). J Am Geriatr S 1974; 22: 107–113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Hersch, EL, Krai, VA, Palmer, RB Clinical value of the London Psychogeriatric Rating Scale. J Am Geriatr Soc 1978; 26: 348–354.Google Scholar
14. Schwartz, GE Development and validation of the Geriatric Evaluation by Relatives Rating Instrument (GERRI). Psychol Rep 1983; 53: 479–488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Reisberg, B, Borenstein, J, Salob, SP, et al. Behavioral symptoms in Alzheimer’s disease: phenomenology and treatment. J Clin Psychiatry 1987; 48 (Suppl): 9–15.Google Scholar
16. Niederehe, G Trims Behavioral Problem Checklist (BPC). Psychopharmacol Bull 1988; 24: 771–773.Google Scholar
17. Mungas, D, Weiler, P, Franzi, C, et al. Assessment of disruptive behavior associated with dementia: the Disruptive Behavior Rating Scales. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 1989; 2: 196–202.Google Scholar
18. Baumgarten, M, Becker, R, Gauthier, S Validity and reliability of the Dementia Behavior Disturbance Scale. J Am Geriatr Soc 1990; 38:221–226.Google Scholar
19. Drachman, DA, Swearer, JM, O’Donnell, BF, Mitchell AL, Maloon A. The Caretaker Obstreperous-Behavior Rating Assessment (COBRA) Scale. J Am Geriatr Soc 1992; 40: 463–480.Google Scholar
20. Cummings, JL, Mega, M, Gary, K, et al. The neuropsychiatric inventory: comprehensive assessment of psychopathology in dementia. Neurology 1994; 44: 2308–2314.Google Scholar
21. Levin, HS, High, WM, Goethe, KE, et al. The neurobehavior rating scale: assessment of the sequelae of head injury by the clinician. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1987; 50: 183–193.Google Scholar
22. Beck, AT, Ward, CH, Mendelson, M, Erbaugh, JK An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1961; 4: 561–571.Google Scholar
23. Hamilton, M. Development of a rating scale for primary depressive illness. Br J Soc Clin Psychol 1967; 6: 278–296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24. Alexopoulos, GS, Abrams, RC, Young, RC, Shamoian, CA. Cornell scale for depression in dementia. Biol Psychiatry 1988; 23: 271–284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25. Taylor, M, Abrams, R . Cognitive dysfunction in mania. Compr Psychiatry 1986; 27: 186–191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26. Neary, D, Snowden, JS, Shields, RA, et al. Single photon emission tomography using 99mTc-HM-PAO in the investigation of dementia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1987; 50: 1101–1109.Google Scholar
27. Miller, BL, Cummings, JL, Villanueva-Meyer, J, et al. Frontal lobe degeneration: clinical, neuropsychological, and SPECT characteristics. Neurology 1991; 41: 1374–1382.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28. Barber, R, Snowden, JS, Craufurd, D Frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer’s disease: retrospective differentiation using information from informants. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1995; 59: 61–70.Google Scholar
29. Kertesz, A, Fox, H, Davidson, W Clinical and behavioral criteria in the diagnosis of frontal lobe dementia. Neurology 1995; 45 (Suppl. 4): A273(#405S).Google Scholar
30. Burns, A, Folstein, S, Brandt, J, et al. Clinical assessment of irritability, aggression, and apathy in Huntington and Alzheimer disease. J Nerv Ment Dis 1990; 178: 20–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
31. Royall, DR, Mahurin, RK, Cornell, J Beside assessment of executive cognitive impairment: The Executive Interview (EXIT). J Am Geriatr Soc 1992; 40: 1221–1226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32. Royall, DR, Mahurin, RK, Cornell, J Bedside assessment of frontal degeneration: distinguishing Alzheimer’s disease from non- Alzheimer’s cortical dementia. Exp Aging Res 1994; 20: 95–103.Google Scholar
33. Kertesz, A. Aphasia, In: Frederiks, JAM, ed. Handbook of Clinical Neurology (Vol. 1/45): Clinical Neurology. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishers, B.V., 1985: 287–331.Google Scholar
34. Mesulam, MM Primary progressive aphasia – differentiation from Alzheimer’s disease. Ann Neurol 1987; 22: 533–534.Google Scholar
35. Gustafson, L Frontal lobe degeneration of non-Alzheimer type. II. Clinical picture and differential diagnosis. Arch Neurol 1987; 6: 209–223.Google ScholarPubMed
36. Molloy, DW, Mcllroy, WE, Guyatt, GH, Lever, JA Validity and reliability of the Dysfunctional Behaviour Rating Instrument. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1991,84: 103–106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
37. Brun, A Frontal lobe degeneration of non-Alzheimer type. I. Neuropathology. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 1987; 6: 193–208.Google Scholar