Graduate Entry Medical School,University of Limerick,Limerick,Ireland.
Cognitive Impairment Research Group,Centre for Interventions in Infection,Inflammation & Immunity (4i),Graduate Entry Medical School,University of Limerick,Limerick,Ireland.
Int Psychogeriatr. 2018 Apr;30(4):493-501. doi: 10.1017/S1041610217002174. Epub 2017 Dec 18.
ABSTRACTBackground:The early and effective detection of neurocognitive disorders poses a key diagnostic challenge. We examined performance on common cognitive bedside tests according to differing delirium syndromal status and clinical (motor) subtypes in hospitalized elderly medical inpatients.
A battery of nine bedside cognitive tests was performed on elderly medical inpatients with DSM-IV delirium, subsyndromal delirium (SSD), and no delirium (ND). Patients with delirium were compared according to clinical (motor) subtypes.
A total of 198 patients (mean age 79.14 ± 8.26) were assessed with full syndromal delirium (FSD: n = 110), SSD (n = 45), and ND (n = 43). Delirium status was not associated with differences in terms of gender distribution, age, or overall medication use. Dementia burden increased with greater delirium status. Overall, the ability to meaningfully engage with the tests varied from 59% for the Vigilance B test to 85% for Spatial Span Forward test and was lowest in patients with FSD, where engagement ranged from 32% for the Vigilance B test to 77% for the Spatial Span Forwards test. The ND group was distinguished from SSD group for the Months of the year backwards, Vigilance B, global VSP, Clock Drawing test, and Interlocking Pentagons test. The SSD group was distinguished from the FSD group by Vigilance A, Spatial Span Forward, and Spatial Span Backwards. Regarding differences among motor subtypes in terms of percentage engagement and performance, the No subtype group had higher ratings across all tests. Delirious patients with no subtype had significantly lower scores on the DRS-R98 than for the other three subtype categories.
Simple bedside tests of attention, vigilance, and visuospatial ability are useful in distinguishing neurocognitive disorders, including SSD from other presentations.
描述性研究
神经认知障碍的早期有效检测是一个关键的诊断挑战。我们研究了不同的谵妄综合征状态和住院老年内科患者的临床(运动)亚型对常见认知床旁测试的表现。
对 DSM-IV 谵妄、亚综合征谵妄(SSD)和无谵妄(ND)的老年内科住院患者进行了一套 9 项床旁认知测试。根据临床(运动)亚型比较了谵妄患者。
共有 198 名患者(平均年龄 79.14 ± 8.26 岁)接受了全面综合征性谵妄(FSD:n = 110)、SSD(n = 45)和 ND(n = 43)的评估。谵妄状态与性别分布、年龄或总体用药无差异相关。痴呆负担随谵妄状态的增加而增加。总的来说,参与测试的能力从 Vigilance B 测试的 59%到 Spatial Span Forward 测试的 85%不等,在 FSD 患者中最低,其中参与程度从 Vigilance B 测试的 32%到 Spatial Span Forwards 测试的 77%不等。ND 组与 SSD 组在月份 backwards、Vigilance B、global VSP、Clock Drawing test 和 Interlocking Pentagons test 上有所不同。SSD 组与 FSD 组在 Vigilance A、Spatial Span Forward 和 Spatial Span Backwards 上有所不同。在不同运动亚型的参与百分比和表现方面,无亚型组在所有测试中都有更高的评分。无亚型的谵妄患者在 DRS-R98 上的得分明显低于其他三个亚型类别。
注意力、警觉性和视空间能力的简单床旁测试有助于区分神经认知障碍,包括 SSD 与其他表现。