Suppr超能文献

弗雷明汉心脏研究中轻度认知障碍和痴呆风险的神经心理学标准。

Neuropsychological Criteria for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia Risk in the Framingham Heart Study.

作者信息

Jak Amy J, Preis Sarah R, Beiser Alexa S, Seshadri Sudha, Wolf Philip A, Bondi Mark W, Au Rhoda

机构信息

1VA San Diego Healthcare System,San Diego,California.

3Framingham Heart Study,Framingham,Massachusetts.

出版信息

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2016 Oct;22(9):937-943. doi: 10.1017/S1355617716000199. Epub 2016 Mar 31.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To refine mild cognitive impairment (MCI) diagnostic criteria, we examined progression to dementia using two approaches to identifying MCI.

METHODS

A total of 1203 Framingham Heart Study participants were classified at baseline as cognitively normal or MCI (overall and four MCI subtypes) via conventional Petersen/Winblad criteria (single cognitive test impaired per domain, >1.5 SD below expectations) or Jak/Bondi criteria (two tests impaired per domain, >1 SD below norms). Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to examine the association between each MCI definition and incident dementia.

RESULTS

The Petersen/Winblad criteria classified 34% of participants as having MCI while the Jak/Bondi criteria classified 24% as MCI. Over a mean follow-up of 9.7 years, 58 participants (5%) developed incident dementia. Both MCI criteria were associated with incident dementia [Petersen/Winblad: hazards ratio (HR) = 2.64; p-value=.0002; Jak/Bondi: HR=3.30; p-value <.0001]. When both MCI definitions were included in the same model, only the Jak/Bondi definition remained statistically significantly associated with incident dementia (HR=2.47; p-value=.008). Multi-domain amnestic and single domain non-amnestic MCI subtypes were significantly associated with incident dementia for both diagnostic approaches (all p-values <.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The Jak/Bondi MCI criteria had a similar association with dementia as the conventional Petersen/Winblad MCI criteria, despite classifying ~30% fewer participants as having MCI. Further exploration of alternative methods to conventional MCI diagnostic criteria is warranted. (JINS, 2016, 22, 937-943).

摘要

目的

为完善轻度认知障碍(MCI)诊断标准,我们采用两种识别MCI的方法研究其向痴呆症的进展情况。

方法

共有1203名弗雷明汉心脏研究参与者在基线时通过传统的彼得森/温布拉德标准(每个领域单项认知测试受损,低于预期>1.5标准差)或雅克/邦迪标准(每个领域两项测试受损,低于常模>1标准差)被分类为认知正常或MCI(总体及四种MCI亚型)。构建Cox比例风险模型以研究每种MCI定义与新发痴呆症之间的关联。

结果

彼得森/温布拉德标准将34%的参与者分类为患有MCI,而雅克/邦迪标准将24%的参与者分类为MCI。在平均9.7年的随访期内,58名参与者(5%)发生了新发痴呆症。两种MCI标准均与新发痴呆症相关[彼得森/温布拉德:风险比(HR)=2.64;p值=0.0002;雅克/邦迪:HR=3.30;p值<0.0001]。当将两种MCI定义纳入同一模型时,只有雅克/邦迪定义与新发痴呆症仍存在统计学显著关联(HR=2.47;p值=0.008)。对于两种诊断方法,多领域遗忘型和单领域非遗忘型MCI亚型均与新发痴呆症显著相关(所有p值<0.01)。

结论

尽管将被分类为患有MCI的参与者数量少约30%,但雅克/邦迪MCI标准与传统的彼得森/温布拉德MCI标准在与痴呆症的关联方面相似。有必要进一步探索传统MCI诊断标准的替代方法。(《神经心理学杂志》,2016年,22卷,937 - 943页)

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

2

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验