Suppr超能文献

评估谵妄中的注意力:注意力床边测试的比较

Evaluating attention in delirium: A comparison of bedside tests of attention.

作者信息

Adamis Dimitrios, Meagher David, Murray Orla, O'Neill Donagh, O'Mahony Edmond, Mulligan Owen, McCarthy Geraldine

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Sligo Mental Health Services, Sligo, Ireland.

Department of Psychiatry, Research and Academic Institute of Athens, Athens, Greece.

出版信息

Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2016 Sep;16(9):1028-35. doi: 10.1111/ggi.12592. Epub 2015 Sep 29.

Abstract

AIM

Impaired attention is a core diagnostic feature for delirium. The present study examined the discriminating properties for patients with delirium versus those with dementia and/or no neurocognitive disorder of four objective tests of attention: digit span, vigilance "A" test, serial 7s subtraction and months of the year backwards together with global clinical subjective rating of attention.

METHODS

This as a prospective study of older patients admitted consecutively in a general hospital. Participants were assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method, Delirium Rating Scale-98 Revised and Montreal Cognitive Assessment scales, and months of the year backwards. Pre-existing dementia was diagnosed according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fourth edition criteria.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 200 participants (mean age 81.1 ± 6.5 years; 50% women; pre-existing cognitive impairment in 126 [63%]). A total of 34 (17%) were identified with delirium (Confusion Assessment Method +). The five approaches to assessing attention had statistically significant correlations (P < 0.05). Discriminant analysis showed that clinical subjective rating of attention in conjunction with the months of the year backwards had the best discriminatory ability to identify Confusion Assessment Method-defined delirium, and to discriminate patients with delirium from those with dementia and/or normal cognition. Both of these approaches had high sensitivity, but modest specificity.

CONCLUSION

Objective tests are useful for prediction of non-delirium, but lack specificity for a delirium diagnosis. Global attentional deficits were more indicative of delirium than deficits of specific domains of attention. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2016; 16: 1028-1035.

摘要

目的

注意力受损是谵妄的核心诊断特征。本研究检验了数字广度、警觉“A”测试、连续减7和倒背月份这四项注意力客观测试以及注意力的整体临床主观评分对谵妄患者与痴呆和/或无神经认知障碍患者的鉴别特性。

方法

这是一项对综合医院连续收治的老年患者的前瞻性研究。使用意识错乱评估方法、谵妄评定量表-98修订版和蒙特利尔认知评估量表以及倒背月份对参与者进行评估。根据《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第四版标准诊断既往痴呆。

结果

样本包括200名参与者(平均年龄81.1±6.5岁;50%为女性;126名[63%]有既往认知障碍)。共识别出34名(17%)谵妄患者(意识错乱评估方法阳性)。评估注意力的五种方法具有统计学显著相关性(P<0.05)。判别分析表明,注意力的临床主观评分结合倒背月份对识别意识错乱评估方法定义的谵妄以及区分谵妄患者与痴呆和/或认知正常患者具有最佳鉴别能力。这两种方法均具有高敏感性,但特异性一般。

结论

客观测试对非谵妄的预测有用,但对谵妄诊断缺乏特异性。整体注意力缺陷比特定注意力领域的缺陷更能指示谵妄。《老年医学与老年病学国际杂志》2016年;16:1028 - 1035。

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