Table 4.
Results of repeat testing in patients undergoing psychometric evaluation twice without interval development of overt HE
| Patients tested twice without interval development of overt HE (n =44) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | Follow-up | Paired t-test p value | |
| MELD score (median) | 9 | 9 | 0.76 |
| Number connection test-A (seconds) | 39 ± 15 | 38 ± 18 | 0.75 |
| Number connection test-B (seconds) | 110 ± 69 | 105 ± 62 | 0.73 |
| Digit Symbol Test (raw score) | 56 ± 12 | 57 ± 20 | 0.09 |
| Block Design Test (raw score) | 29 ± 13 | 33 ± 20 | 0.39 |
| ICT targets (% correct) | 95 ± 5 | 94 ± 9 | 0.54 |
| ICT lures (number) | 11 ± 7 | 11 ± 5 | 0.97 |
| ICT lures (1st half: runs I–III) | 7 ± 3 | 8 ± 4 | 0.23 |
| ICT lures (2nd half: runs IV–VI) | 4 ± 3* | 4 ± 4* | 0.45 |
| ΔL1–2 (lures in the 1st half minus the 2nd half) | 2.1 | 1.8 | 0.52 |
*
p=0.001 in the 1st half compared to the 2nd half indicating successful learning.
There was no significant difference in any psychometric test or MELD score in the group that was tested twice without the interval development of overt HE and the learning effect on the ICT was maintained in both visits. A high score on number connection-A/B and ICT lures and a low digit symbol, block design and ICT target number indicate poor psychometric performance. MELD: model for end-stage liver disease score, Overt HE: overt hepatic encephalopathy adequately controlled on treatment, ICT: inhibitory control test.