Louis Elan D, Factor-Litvak Pam
Department of Neurology, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Conn., USA.
Neuroepidemiology. 2016;46(1):51-6. doi: 10.1159/000442576. Epub 2015 Dec 17.
There are nearly no published screening instruments for essential tremor (ET). This is a remarkable fact, given its high prevalence. Here, we assess the validity of a screening questionnaire and hand-drawn spirals and also estimate the prevalence of ET in a community sample.
Four hundred nineteen study subjects living in a geographically defined area in the New York metropolitan area were contacted using a random digit telephone dialing scheme. Seven tremor screening questions were administered and each subject drew 2 spirals. A movement disorders neurologist assigned ET diagnoses based on neurological examination.
The spirals were a more sensitive test than the screening questions (73.7 vs. 26.3%); specificities of the 2 tests were similar (95.5 vs. 96.8%). The combination of both tests was not superior to the use of spirals alone. The positive predictive value of the spiral test was 43.8%. The crude prevalence of ET, 19 of 419 (4.53%, 95% CI 2.92-6.97), increased with age (p = 0.049).
A screening spiral was more sensitive than a screening questionnaire for ET and was moderately sensitive. Nearly one-half of subjects who screened positive had ET; therefore, when screening a population, one can expect the number of true positives and false positives to be roughly equivalent.
几乎没有已发表的用于特发性震颤(ET)的筛查工具。考虑到其高患病率,这是一个值得注意的事实。在此,我们评估一份筛查问卷和手绘螺旋线的有效性,并估计社区样本中ET的患病率。
采用随机数字拨号方案联系了居住在纽约大都市地区地理定义区域内的419名研究对象。进行了7个震颤筛查问题的询问,并且每个对象绘制2条螺旋线。一名运动障碍神经科医生根据神经学检查做出ET诊断。
螺旋线比筛查问题是更敏感的测试(73.7%对26.3%);这两种测试的特异性相似(95.5%对96.8%)。两种测试的组合并不优于单独使用螺旋线。螺旋线测试的阳性预测值为43.8%。ET的粗患病率为419例中的19例(4.53%,95%可信区间2.92 - 6.97),随年龄增加(p = 0.049)。
对于ET,筛查螺旋线比筛查问卷更敏感且具有中度敏感性。筛查呈阳性的对象中近一半患有ET;因此,在对人群进行筛查时,可以预期真阳性和假阳性的数量大致相等。