Suppr超能文献

老年人认知功能减退知情者问卷(IQCODE)用于二级医疗环境中痴呆症的诊断。

Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) for the diagnosis of dementia within a secondary care setting.

作者信息

Harrison Jennifer K, Fearon Patricia, Noel-Storr Anna H, McShane Rupert, Stott David J, Quinn Terry J

机构信息

Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester, UK, LE1 5WW.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Mar 10(3):CD010772. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010772.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of dementia relies on the presence of new-onset cognitive impairment affecting an individual's functioning and activities of daily living. The Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) is a questionnaire instrument, completed by a suitable 'informant' who knows the patient well, designed to assess change in functional performance secondary to cognitive change; it is used as a tool to identifying those who may have dementia.In secondary care there are two specific instances where patients may be assessed for the presence of dementia. These are in the general acute hospital setting, where opportunistic screening may be undertaken, or in specialist memory services where individuals have been referred due to perceived cognitive problems. To ensure an instrument is suitable for diagnostic use in these settings, its test accuracy must be established.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the informant-based questionnaire IQCODE, for detection of all-cause (undifferentiated) dementia in adults presenting to secondary-care services.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources on the 28th of January 2013: ALOIS (Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group), MEDLINE (Ovid SP), EMBASE (Ovid SP), PsycINFO (Ovid SP), BIOSIS Previews (Thomson Reuters Web of Science), Web of Science Core Collection (includes Conference Proceedings Citation Index) (Thomson Reuters Web of Science), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) and LILACS (BIREME). We also searched sources specific to diagnostic test accuracy: MEDION (Universities of Maastricht and Leuven); DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects - via the Cochrane Library); HTA Database (Health Technology Assessment Database via the Cochrane Library) and ARIF (Birmingham University). We also checked reference lists of relevant studies and reviews, used searches of known relevant studies in PubMed to track related articles, and contacted research groups conducting work on IQCODE for dementia diagnosis to try to find additional studies. We developed a sensitive search strategy; search terms were designed to cover key concepts using several different approaches run in parallel and included terms relating to cognitive tests, cognitive screening and dementia. We used standardised database subject headings such as MeSH terms (in MEDLINE) and other standardised headings (controlled vocabulary) in other databases, as appropriate.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected those studies performed in secondary-care settings, which included (not necessarily exclusively) IQCODE to assess for the presence of dementia and where dementia diagnosis was confirmed with clinical assessment. For the 'secondary care' setting we included all studies which assessed patients in hospital (e.g. acute unscheduled admissions, referrals to specialist geriatric assessment services etc.) and those referred for specialist 'memory' assessment, typically in psychogeriatric services.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We screened all titles generated by electronic database searches, and reviewed abstracts of all potentially relevant studies. Two independent assessors checked full papers for eligibility and extracted data. We determined quality assessment (risk of bias and applicability) using the QUADAS-2 tool, and reporting quality using the STARD tool.

MAIN RESULTS

From 72 papers describing IQCODE test accuracy, we included 13 papers, representing data from 2745 individuals (n = 1413 (51%) with dementia). Pooled analysis of all studies using data presented closest to a cut-off of 3.3 indicated that sensitivity was 0.91 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.94); specificity 0.66 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.75); the positive likelihood ratio was 2.7 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.6) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.14 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.22).There was a statistically significant difference in test accuracy between the general hospital setting and the specialist memory setting (P = 0.019), suggesting that IQCODE performs better in a 'general' setting.We found no significant differences in the test accuracy of the short (16-item) versus the 26-item IQCODE, or in the language of administration.There was significant heterogeneity in the included studies, including a highly varied prevalence of dementia (10.5% to 87.4%). Across the included papers there was substantial potential for bias, particularly around sampling of included participants and selection criteria, which may limit generalisability. There was also evidence of suboptimal reporting, particularly around disease severity and handling indeterminate results, which are important if considering use in clinical practice.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The IQCODE can be used to identify older adults in the general hospital setting who are at risk of dementia and require specialist assessment; it is useful specifically for ruling out those without evidence of cognitive decline. The language of administration did not affect test accuracy, which supports the cross-cultural use of the tool. These findings are qualified by the significant heterogeneity, the potential for bias and suboptimal reporting found in the included studies.

摘要

背景

痴呆症的诊断依赖于新发认知障碍的存在,这种障碍会影响个体的功能及日常生活活动。老年人认知功能减退知情者问卷(IQCODE)是一种问卷工具,由熟悉患者情况的合适“知情者”填写,旨在评估认知变化继发的功能表现变化;它被用作识别可能患有痴呆症患者的工具。在二级医疗保健中,有两种特定情况可能会对患者进行痴呆症评估。一种是在综合急症医院环境中进行机会性筛查,另一种是在专科记忆服务机构中,因认知问题被转诊的个体接受评估。为确保一种工具适用于这些环境中的诊断用途,必须确定其测试准确性。

目的

确定基于知情者的问卷IQCODE在二级医疗保健服务机构中对成人全因(未分化)痴呆症的诊断准确性。

检索方法

我们于2013年1月28日检索了以下来源:ALOIS(Cochrane痴呆与认知改善小组)、MEDLINE(Ovid SP)、EMBASE(Ovid SP)、PsycINFO(Ovid SP)、BIOSIS Previews(汤森路透科学网)、科学网核心合集(包括会议论文引用索引)(汤森路透科学网)、CINAHL(EBSCOhost)和LILACS(BIREME)。我们还检索了特定于诊断测试准确性的来源:MEDION(马斯特里赫特大学和鲁汶大学);DARE(循证医学数据库 - 通过Cochrane图书馆);卫生技术评估数据库(通过Cochrane图书馆的卫生技术评估数据库)和ARIF(伯明翰大学)。我们还检查了相关研究和综述的参考文献列表,利用在PubMed中对已知相关研究的检索来追踪相关文章,并联系开展IQCODE痴呆症诊断工作的研究小组以试图找到更多研究。我们制定了一个敏感的检索策略;检索词旨在通过并行运行的几种不同方法涵盖关键概念,并包括与认知测试、认知筛查和痴呆症相关的术语。我们在适当情况下使用标准化数据库主题词,如MEDLINE中的医学主题词(MeSH)和其他数据库中的其他标准化主题词(受控词汇)。

选择标准

我们选择在二级医疗保健环境中进行的研究,这些研究包括(不一定仅)使用IQCODE评估痴呆症的存在,并且痴呆症诊断通过临床评估得到证实。对于“二级医疗保健”环境,我们纳入了所有评估住院患者的研究(例如急性非计划入院患者、转诊至专科老年评估服务等)以及那些被转诊进行专科“记忆”评估的患者,通常是在老年精神科服务中。

数据收集与分析

我们筛选了电子数据库检索生成的所有标题,并审查了所有潜在相关研究的摘要。两名独立评估人员检查全文的合格性并提取数据。我们使用QUADAS - 2工具确定质量评估(偏倚风险和适用性),并使用STARD工具确定报告质量。

主要结果

从72篇描述IQCODE测试准确性的论文中,我们纳入了13篇论文,代表来自2745名个体的数据(n = 1413(51%)患有痴呆症)。使用最接近截断值3.3的数据对所有研究进行的汇总分析表明,敏感性为0.91(95%置信区间0.86至0.94);特异性为0.66(95%置信区间0.56至0.75);阳性似然比为2.7(95%置信区间2.0至3.6),阴性似然比为0.14(95%置信区间0.09至0.22)。综合医院环境和专科记忆评估环境之间的测试准确性存在统计学显著差异(P = 0.019),这表明IQCODE在“综合”环境中表现更好。我们发现简短(16项)IQCODE与26项IQCODE的测试准确性以及施测语言之间没有显著差异。纳入的研究存在显著异质性,包括痴呆症患病率差异很大(10.5%至87.4%)。在所纳入的论文中,存在大量偏倚的可能性,特别是在纳入参与者的抽样和选择标准方面,这可能会限制普遍性。也有证据表明报告不够理想,特别是在疾病严重程度和处理不确定结果方面,如果考虑在临床实践中使用,这些方面很重要。

作者结论

IQCODE可用于识别综合医院环境中存在痴呆症风险且需要专科评估的老年人;它特别有助于排除那些没有认知功能减退证据的人。施测语言不影响测试准确性,这支持了该工具的跨文化使用。这些发现因纳入研究中存在的显著异质性、偏倚可能性和报告不理想而受到限制。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验