Abstract Introduction: Cognitive impairment is common in Parkinson’s disease and represents a risk for dementia. Identifying associated factors will help implement early interventions and study its progression. Objective: To identify factors associated with cognitive impairment. Method: Cross-sectional study of 306 subjects with Parkinson’s disease who were assessed for 12 months. Demographics and clinical variables were analyzed as explanatory variables, and cognitive impairment as outcome variable. Significant variables were used to construct a cognitive impairment predictive model. Results: Cognitive impairment was reported in 43.8%. Female gender (p = 0.001, odds ratio [OR] = 1.77), age at diagnosis (p < 0.001, mean deviation [MD] = 5.7), level of education (p < 0.001, MD = −2.9), disease duration (p = 0.003, MD = 1.7), MDS-UPDRS part III score (p < 0.001, MD = 9.7), presence of anxiety (p = 0.007, OR = 2.11), hallucinations (p = 0.029, OR = 2.27) and freezing of gait (p = 0.048, OR = 1.91) were predictors for cognitive impairment. The use of type B monoamine oxidase inhibitors was associated with less cognitive impairment (p = 0.001). Conclusions: Predictive factors that were consistent with those previously reported were identified. Prospective studies are required in order to clarify the effect of type B monoamine oxidase inhibitors on cognition.

Resumen Introducción: El deterioro cognitivo en Parkinson es común y representa un riesgo para demencia. Identificar los factores asociados ayudará a implementar intervenciones tempranas y estudiar la progresión del deterioro cognitivo. Objetivo: Identificar factores asociados con deterioro cognitivo. Método: Estudio transversal de 306 sujetos con Parkinson evaluados durante los últimos 12 meses. Se estudiaron variables demográficas y clínicas como explicativas y el deterioro cognitivo como desenlace. Las variables significativas se utilizaron para construir un modelo predictor de deterioro cognitivo. Resultados: El 43.8 % reportó deterioro cognitivo. El sexo femenino (p = 0.001, RM = 1.77), edad al diagnóstico (p < 0.001, desviación media [DM] 5.7), escolaridad (p < 0.001, DM −2.9), duración de enfermedad (p = 0.003, DM 1.7), puntuación en MDS-UPDRS parte III (p < 0.001, DM 9.7), presencia de ansiedad (p = 0.007, RM = 2.11), de alucinaciones (p = 0.029, RM = 2.27) y congelamientos de la marcha (p = 0.048, RM = 1.91) fueron predictores para deterioro cognitivo. El uso de inhibidores monoamina-oxidasa tipo B se asoció con menor deterioro cognitivo (p = 0.001). Conclusiones: Se identificaron factores predictores consistentes con lo reportado previamente. Se requieren estudios prospectivos para aclarar el efecto de los inhibidores monoamina-oxidasa tipo B en la cognición.

Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo é determinar se o University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) é uma ferramenta diagnóstica útil para a caracterizar disfunção olfativa na doença de Parkinson (DP). Método: Foram incluídos 138 indivíduos não dementes assuntos PD e 175 indivíduos controle pareados por sexo. Identificação cheiro foi testada usando UPSIT. Resultados: O número médio de itens UPSIT corretamente identificados pelos controles foi de 27,52±5,88; para sujeitos com DP foi de 19,66±6,08 (p=<0,001). A sensibilidade do UPSIT foi de 79,7%, com especificidade de 68,5%, utilizando um ponto de corte de ≤25. A exatidão global para o diagnóstico de DP foi de 75,3%. Conclusão: A precisão e a especificidade do UPSIT foram menores do que o que foi relatado anteriormente. Nossos dados demonstram que 17,5% dos itens da UPSIT não foram adequadamente identificados pelos controles saudáveis. São necessárias outras pesquisas para a identificação de um teste verdadeiramente cross-cultural nessa área.

Objective: The aim of this study is to determine if the University of Pennsylvania’s Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) is an accurate diagnostic tool for olfactory dysfunction in Parkinson’s disease (PD). Method: We included 138 non-demented PD subjects and 175 control subjects matched by gender. Smell identification was tested using UPSIT. Results: The mean number of UPSIT items correctly identified by controls was 27.52±5.88; the mean score for PD subjects was 19.66±6.08 (p=<0.001). UPSIT sensitivity was 79.7% with a specificity of 68.5% using a cut-off score of ≤25. The overall accuracy for the diagnosis of PD was of 75.3%. Conclusion: UPSIT accuracy and specificity were lower than what has been previously reported. Our data demonstrates that 17.5% of items of the UPSIT were not well identified by healthy controls. Further research of the identification of a truly cross-cultural test is warranted.