Background: Cognitive impairment is a frequent, but frequently overlooked, complication of epilepsy that has a negative impact on patients’ quality of life and functioning. Recurrent seizures and neurological factors can have a deleterious effect on multiple cognitive domains such as memory, attention, and executive function. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scale was used to assess cognitive impairment in patients with epilepsy in this study. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to estimate the prevalence of cognitive impairment in patients with diagnosed epilepsy for more than 2 years using the MoCA scale, assess cognitive function using the MoCA score in epilepsy patients, and determine the prevalence of cognitive impairment. Materials and Methods: A hospital-based prospective observational study was conducted among 97 patients with epilepsy for 18 months. A MoCA scale (0–30) was used to evaluate cognitive function. Means and standard deviations were given for numerical variables, and frequencies and percentages were reported for categorical variables. The Fisher’s exact test or Chi-square test was used for the analysis of categorical variables as appropriate. Results: The prevalence of cognitive impairment was significantly higher in the group with hypertension (45, 95.7%) than in the group without hypertension (40, 80.0%) (χ 2 = 5.54, P = 0.02). The association between cognitive impairment and diabetes mellitus was not statistically significant. The associations with hypothyroidism, cerebrovascular accident, and ischemic heart disease were not statistically significant, as per Fisher’s exact test ( P = 0.99, 0.07, and 0.99, respectively). Conclusion: Based on these findings, it is concluded that there is a need to consider cognitive impairment as an important and often unrecognized comorbidity with the overall disease burden of patients with epilepsy. The authors emphasize that it is crucial to include routine cognitive assessments in daily clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Batchu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: