Suppr超能文献

虚弱筛查方法在晚期慢性肾脏病中的诊断准确性。

Diagnostic Accuracy of Frailty Screening Methods in Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease.

机构信息

Department of Renal Medicine, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, United Kingdom,

Centre for Health Research and Innovation, National Institute of Health Research Lancashire Clinical Research Facility, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, United Kingdom,

出版信息

Nephron. 2019;141(3):147-155. doi: 10.1159/000494223. Epub 2018 Dec 14.

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Frail patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have an increased hospitalisation and mortality rate. However, many popular frailty screening methods have not been validated in patients with CKD. This study evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of several frailty screening methods in patients with CKD G4-5 and those established on haemodialysis (G5D).

METHODS

Ninety participants with CKD G4-5D were recruited from Nephrology Outpatient Clinics and 2 Haemodialysis Units between December 2016 and December 2017. Frailty was diagnosed using the Fried Frailty Phenotype. The following frailty screening tests were evaluated: Clinical Frailty Scale, PRISMA-7, CKD Frailty Index, CKD FI-LAB, walking speed, hand grip strength and Short Physical Performance Battery.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 69 years (SD ±13). One-third of participants were dialysis-dependent. Nineteen (21%) patients were categorised as frail, 42 (47%) as pre-frail and 29 (32%) as robust. Overall, walking speed was the most discriminative measure (AUC 0.97 [95% CI 0.93-1.00], sensitivity 0.84 [95% CI 0.62-0.94], specificity 0.96 [95% CI 0.88-0.99]). The Clinical Frailty Scale had the best performance of the non-physical assessment frailty screening methods (AUC 0.90 [95% CI 0.84-0.97], sensitivity 0.79 [95% CI 0.57-0.91], specificity 0.87 [95% CI 0.78-0.93]).

CONCLUSIONS

Walking speed can be used to accurately screen for frailty in CKD populations. If it is not practical to perform a physical assessment to screen for frailty, the Clinical Frailty Scale is a useful alternative.

摘要

背景/目的:患有慢性肾脏病(CKD)的虚弱患者住院率和死亡率较高。然而,许多流行的虚弱筛查方法尚未在 CKD 患者中得到验证。本研究评估了几种在 CKD G4-5 患者和接受血液透析(G5D)的患者中进行的虚弱筛查方法的诊断准确性。

方法

2016 年 12 月至 2017 年 12 月期间,从肾脏病门诊和 2 个血液透析单位招募了 90 名患有 CKD G4-5D 的参与者。使用 Fried 虚弱表型诊断虚弱。评估了以下虚弱筛查测试:临床虚弱量表、PRISMA-7、CKD 虚弱指数、CKD FI-LAB、步行速度、握力和简短身体表现电池。

结果

参与者的平均年龄为 69 岁(SD ±13)。三分之一的参与者依赖透析。19 名(21%)患者被归类为虚弱,42 名(47%)为虚弱前期,29 名(32%)为健壮。总体而言,步行速度是最具鉴别力的指标(AUC 0.97 [95% CI 0.93-1.00],敏感性 0.84 [95% CI 0.62-0.94],特异性 0.96 [95% CI 0.88-0.99])。临床虚弱量表在非身体评估虚弱筛查方法中表现最佳(AUC 0.90 [95% CI 0.84-0.97],敏感性 0.79 [95% CI 0.57-0.91],特异性 0.87 [95% CI 0.78-0.93])。

结论

步行速度可用于准确筛查 CKD 人群的虚弱。如果进行身体评估以筛查虚弱不切实际,则临床虚弱量表是一种有用的替代方法。

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