Suppr超能文献

抗胆碱能负担量表之间的一致性。

Concordance Between Anticholinergic Burden Scales.

作者信息

Naples Jennifer G, Marcum Zachary A, Perera Subashan, Gray Shelly L, Newman Anne B, Simonsick Eleanor M, Yaffe Kristine, Shorr Ronald I, Hanlon Joseph T

机构信息

Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Department of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, School of Pharmacy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

出版信息

J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015 Oct;63(10):2120-4. doi: 10.1111/jgs.13647.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate concordance of five commonly used anticholinergic scales.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional secondary analysis.

SETTING

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Memphis, Tennessee.

PARTICIPANTS

Community-dwelling adults aged 70 to 79 with baseline medication data from the Health, Aging, and Body Composition Study (N = 3,055).

MEASUREMENTS

Any anticholinergic use, weighted scores, and total standardized daily dosage were calculated using five anticholinergic measures (Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) Scale, Anticholinergic Drug Scale (ADS), Anticholinergic Risk Scale (ARS), Drug Burden Index anticholinergic component (DBI-ACh), and Summated Anticholinergic Medications Scale (SAMS)). Concordance was evaluated using kappa statistics and Spearman rank correlations.

RESULTS

Any anticholinergic use in rank order was 51% for the ACB, 43% for the ADS, 29% for the DBI-ACh, 23% for the ARS, and 16% for the SAMS. Kappa statistics for all pairwise use comparisons ranged from 0.33 to 0.68. Similarly, concordance as measured using weighted kappa statistics ranged from 0.54 to 0.70 for the three scales not incorporating dosage (ADS, ARS, ACB). Spearman rank correlation between the DBI-ACh and SAMS was 0.50.

CONCLUSION

Only low to moderate concordance was found between the five anticholinergic scales. Future research is needed to examine how these differences in measurement affect their predictive validity with respect to clinically relevant outcomes, such as cognitive impairment.

摘要

目的

评估五种常用抗胆碱能量表的一致性。

设计

横断面二次分析。

地点

宾夕法尼亚州匹兹堡市和田纳西州孟菲斯市。

参与者

年龄在70至79岁之间、来自健康、衰老和身体成分研究且有基线用药数据的社区居住成年人(N = 3055)。

测量指标

使用五种抗胆碱能测量方法(抗胆碱能认知负担(ACB)量表、抗胆碱能药物量表(ADS)、抗胆碱能风险量表(ARS)、药物负担指数抗胆碱能成分(DBI - ACh)和抗胆碱能药物汇总量表(SAMS))计算任何抗胆碱能药物的使用情况、加权分数和每日标准化总剂量。使用kappa统计量和Spearman等级相关性评估一致性。

结果

按使用比例排序,ACB量表显示的任何抗胆碱能药物使用率为51%,ADS为43%,DBI - ACh为29%,ARS为23%,SAMS为16%。所有成对使用比较的kappa统计量范围为0.33至0.68。同样,对于未纳入剂量的三种量表(ADS、ARS、ACB),使用加权kappa统计量测量的一致性范围为0.54至0.70。DBI - ACh和SAMS之间存在中等程度的Spearman等级相关性(Spearman等级相关系数为0.50)。

结论

在这五种抗胆碱能量表之间仅发现低至中等程度的一致性。未来需要开展研究,以检验这些测量差异如何影响它们在诸如认知障碍等临床相关结局方面的预测效度。

相似文献

1
Concordance Between Anticholinergic Burden Scales.抗胆碱能负担量表之间的一致性。
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015 Oct;63(10):2120-4. doi: 10.1111/jgs.13647.
6
Evaluation of anticholinergic burden of medications in older adults.评估老年人用药的抗胆碱能负担。
J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2013 Sep-Oct;53(5):496-504. doi: 10.1331/JAPhA.2013.12138.

引用本文的文献

9

本文引用的文献

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