Suppr超能文献

在临床实践中进行阿尔茨海默病和轻度认知障碍的认知筛查时的画钟测验。

Clock drawing test in screening for Alzheimer's dementia and mild cognitive impairment in clinical practice.

机构信息

Memory Clinic, Department of Neurology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic.

International Clinical Research Center, St. Anne's University Hospital Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.

出版信息

Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2017 Sep;32(9):933-939. doi: 10.1002/gps.4549. Epub 2016 Jul 28.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The clock drawing test (CDT) is a commonly used brief cognitive measure. We evaluated diagnostic accuracy of subjective ratings of CDT by physicians (with/without specialty in cognitive neurology) and neuropsychologists in discriminating amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), Alzheimer's dementia (AD) and cognitively healthy older adults. We further compared the diagnostic accuracy of subjective categorical ratings with complex scoring of CDT.

METHODS

Three cognitive neurologists, three neuropsychologists and six neurology residents without experience in cognitive neurology blinded to the diagnosis rated 187 CDTs (50 mild AD, 49 aMCI and 88 cognitively healthy older adults) using a "yes" (abnormal) versus "suspected" versus "no" (normal) classification. The rating suspected was combined with yes or no to obtain two sets of sensitivity estimates. We also used a 17-point CDT rating system.

RESULTS

When using the categorical rating, neuropsychologists had highest sensitivity (89%) in differentiating patients with mild AD (yes/suspected versus no), followed by neurologic residents (80%) and cognitive neurologists (79%). When differentiating patients with aMCI (yes/suspected versus no), the sensitivity was 84% for neuropsychologists, 64% for cognitive neurologists and 62% for residents. The sensitivity using the complex scoring system was 92% in patients with mild AD and 69% in patients with aMCI.

CONCLUSIONS

A categorical rating of CDT shows high sensitivity for mild AD even in non-experienced raters. Neuropsychologists outperformed physicians in differentiating patients with aMCI from cognitively healthy older adults (specificity), which was counterbalanced by the lower specificity of their ratings. The diagnostic accuracy was not substantially improved by using complex scoring system. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

摘要

目的

画钟测验(CDT)是一种常用的简短认知测量方法。我们评估了医生(有/无认知神经病学专业)和神经心理学家主观评定 CDT 区分遗忘型轻度认知障碍(aMCI)、阿尔茨海默病(AD)和认知健康老年人的诊断准确性。我们进一步比较了主观分类评定与 CDT 复杂评分的诊断准确性。

方法

3 位认知神经病学家、3 位神经心理学家和 6 位无认知神经病学经验的神经内科住院医师对 187 份 CDT(50 份轻度 AD、49 份 aMCI 和 88 份认知健康老年人)进行了盲法诊断,采用“是”(异常)、“可疑”和“否”(正常)分类进行评定。可疑评定与是或否相结合,以获得两组敏感性估计值。我们还使用了 17 分的 CDT 评分系统。

结果

使用分类评定时,神经心理学家在区分轻度 AD 患者(是/可疑与否)方面具有最高的敏感性(89%),其次是神经内科住院医师(80%)和认知神经病学家(79%)。在区分 aMCI 患者(是/可疑与否)时,神经心理学家的敏感性为 84%,认知神经病学家为 64%,住院医师为 62%。在轻度 AD 患者中,复杂评分系统的敏感性为 92%,在 aMCI 患者中为 69%。

结论

即使在非经验评定者中,CDT 的分类评定也显示出对轻度 AD 的高敏感性。神经心理学家在区分 aMCI 患者与认知健康老年人方面优于医生(特异性),但他们的评定特异性较低。使用复杂评分系统并未显著提高诊断准确性。版权所有 © 2016 约翰威利父子公司

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