Neuropsychological assessment via video conferencing has been proposed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Existing literature has demonstrated feasibility and acceptance of neuropsychological measures administered by videoconference, although few studies have examined feasibility and patient acceptance of TNP visits directly to patients’ homes (DTH-TNP).

We modified a previously published patient satisfaction survey for DTH-TNP and developed a clinician feasibility survey to examine experiences during DTH-TNP.

Seventy-two patients (age range: preschool-geriatric) evaluated by DTH-TNP for cognitive problems at an academic medical center responded to voluntary surveys between April 20, 2020, and August 19, 2020, and 100% indicated satisfaction. Fifty-nine percent of patients reported limitations (e.g., technological concern) during the appointment. 134 clinician surveys were collected and indicated that clinicians achieved the goal of their appointment in 90% of encounters.

These qualitative data suggest that patients and clinicians found DTH-TNP to be satisfactory during the COVID-19 pandemic, while also recognizing limitations of the practice. These results are limited in that voluntary surveys are subject to bias. They support the growing body of literature suggesting that DTH-TNP provides a valuable service, though additional research to establish reliability and validity is needed.

Clinical diagnosis has been shown to be unreliable compared to structured diagnostic schedules. However, clinicians rarely use structured diagnostic schedules due to concerns about the feasibility in clinical practice and about patient acceptance. Mini International Neuropsychiatric Schedule is a short diagnostic instrument validated against SCID and CIDI but its feasibility and patient acceptance has not been studied.

One hundred and eleven patients admitted to a partial program were administered Mini International Neuropsychiatric Schedule and the interview was timed. A short questionnaire was administered to assess patients’ views about the interview. For a subgroup of patients, diagnoses by both open interviews and Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) were available. These were compared to look for agreement in primary diagnoses and co-morbid conditions.

MINI took an average of 16.4 min to administer. Patients’ views of MINI were positive. It was considered comprehensive enough to cover all patient symptoms and at the same time not unduly lengthy. Patients were not bothered by the interview format. There was disagreement between MINI primary diagnosis and open diagnosis in 42% cases. In 33% the disagreement was of substantial clinical significance. MINI diagnosed more co-morbid conditions (average 2.05 compared to 0.5 in open interview).

MINI is a short diagnostic interview schedule that can be easily incorporated into routine clinical interviews. It has good acceptance by patients.