Preliminary Study of the Utility of the Menu Task in an Acute Care Setting.
Gordon M Giles, Timothy S Marks, Terri Flynn and 4 others
PMID 40678283WHAT IT FOUND
The Menu Task flagged 79.8% of 104 acute inpatients as impaired, versus 64.4% on the Mini-Cog.
Its scores rose as Mini-Cog scores rose, and it took a median 7 minutes, so it may catch functional cognition problems that screening misses.
Key findings
01The Menu Task categorized 79.8% of participants as impaired, compared with 64.4% categorized as impaired by the Mini-Cog.
02Mean Menu Task scores increased as Mini-Cog scores increased.
03Menu Task scores had low and nonsignificant correlations with AM-PAC Basic Mobility and Daily Activity scores.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was done at one acute hospital and used a convenience sample, so the findings may not apply to other settings or patients. The sample was modest, with 104 participants analysed after 5 of 109 enrolled participants were dropped. Patients with aphasia, motor or visual deficits, severe pain or distress, or who could not attend for 15 minutes were excluded, so the results do not speak to many common acute care presentations. There was no follow-up data, so the study cannot show that Menu Task scores predicted discharge placement, readmission, therapy use, or recovery.
Declared interests
The investigators reported no financial or nonfinancial disclosures.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the higher Menu Task impairment rate as proof that it improves patient care or that it should replace the Mini-Cog. The study had no follow-up outcomes and only showed that the Menu Task identified more impairment than the Mini-Cog in one acute care sample.