Introduction and Aims: Cognitive impairments in substance use disorder predict treatment outcome and are assumed to differ between substances. They often go undetected, thus the current study focuses on the prevalence of and differences in cognitive functioning across substances by means of a cognitive screen at the early stage of addiction treatment.Design and Methods: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment was administered to outpatients seeking treatment for substance use disorder. Patient characteristics (age, years of regular use, polysubstance use, severity of dependence/abuse, depression, anxiety and stress) were also taken into account.Results: A total of 656 patients were included (n = 391 used alcohol, n = 123 used cannabis, n = 100 used stimulants and n = 26 used opioids). The prevalence of cognitive impairments was 31%. Patients using alcohol had a lower total‐ and memory domain score than those using cannabis. Patients using opioids scored lower on visuospatial abilities than those using cannabis or stimulants. Younger patients scored higher than older patients. No effect was found for the other investigated characteristics.Discussion and Conclusions: Given the high prevalence of cognitive impairments, standard screening at an early stage of treatment is important to determine the course of treatment and maximise treatment outcome. Caution is needed in interpreting results about opioids due to an underrepresentation of this patient group, and more research is needed on the effect of age on Montreal Cognitive Assessment performance.

Objectives: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a cognitive screen, available in three alternate versions. Aims of the current study were to examine the effects of age, education and intelligence on MoCA performance and to determine the alternate-form equivalence and test–retest reliability of the MoCA, in a group of healthy participants. Method: In 210 participants, two MoCA versions and an estimator for premorbid intelligence were administered at two time points. Results: Age, education and estimated premorbid intelligence correlated significantly with the total score (MoCA-TS) and the Memory Index Score (MoCA-MIS). Systematic differences between MoCA version 7.1 and alternate versions 7.2 and 7.3 were only found for the items animal naming, abstract reasoning and sentence repetition. Test–retest reliability of the MoCA-TS was good between 7.1 and 7.2 (ICC: 0.64) and excellent between 7.1 and 7.3 (ICC: 0.82). For the MoCA-MIS, coefficients were poor (ICC: 0.32) to fair (ICC: 0.48), respectively. Conclusion: Adequate norms are needed that take the effects of age, education and intelligence on MoCA performance into account. All three MoCA versions are largely equivalent based on MoCA-TS and the test–retest reliabilities show that this score is suitable to monitor cognitive change over time. Comparisons of the domain-specific scores should be interpreted with caution.

(1) Background: There is a need for a brief assessment of cognitive function, both in patient care and scientific research, for which the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a psychometrically reliable and valid tool. However, fine-grained normative data allowing for adjustment for age, education, and/or sex are lacking, especially for its Memory Index Score (MIS). (2) Methods: A total of 820 healthy individuals aged 18–91 (366 men) completed the Dutch MoCA (version 7.1), of whom 182 also completed the cued recall and recognition memory subtests enabling calculation of the MIS. Regression-based normative data were computed for the MoCA Total Score and MIS, following the data-handling procedure of the Advanced Neuropsychological Diagnostics Infrastructure (ANDI). (3) Results: Age, education level, and sex were significant predictors of the MoCA Total Score (Conditional R² = 0.4, Marginal R² = 0.12, restricted maximum likelihood (REML) criterion at convergence: 3470.1) and MIS (Marginal R² = 0.14, REML criterion at convergence: 682.8). Percentile distributions are presented that allow for age, education and sex adjustment for the MoCA Total Score and the MIS. (4) Conclusions: We present normative data covering the full adult life span that can be used for the screening for overall cognitive deficits and memory impairment, not only in older people with or people at risk of neurodegenerative disease, but also in younger individuals with acquired brain injury, neurological disease, or non-neurological medical conditions.

(1) Background: Virtual reality (VR) has been investigated in a variety of psychiatric disorders, including addictive disorders (ADs); (2) Objective: This systematic review evaluates the current evidence of immersive VR (using head-mounted displays) in the clinical assessment and treatment of ADs; (3) Method: PubMed and PsycINFO were queried for publications up to November 2020; (4) Results: We screened 4519 titles, 114 abstracts and 85 full-texts, and analyzed 36 articles regarding the clinical assessment (i.e., diagnostic and prognostic value; n = 19) and treatment (i.e., interventions; n = 17) of ADs. Though most VR assessment studies (n = 15/19) showed associations between VR-induced cue-reactivity and clinical parameters, only two studies specified diagnostic value. VR treatment studies based on exposure therapy showed no or negative effects. However, other VR interventions like embodied and aversive learning paradigms demonstrated positive findings. The overall study quality was rather poor; (5) Conclusion: Though VR in ADs provides ecologically valid environments to induce cue-reactivity and provide new treatment paradigms, the added clinical value in assessment and therapy remains to be elucidated before VR can be applied in clinical care. Therefore, future work should investigate VR efficacy in randomized clinical trials using well-defined clinical endpoints.