Kvitting Anna S, Johansson Maria M, Marcusson Jan
Division of Community Medicine/General Practice, Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Acute Internal Medicine and Geriatrics and Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Dement Geriatr Cogn Dis Extra. 2019 Aug 14;9(2):294-301. doi: 10.1159/000501365. eCollection 2019 May-Aug.
There are several cognitive assessment tools used in primary care, e.g., the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. The Cognitive Assessment Battery (CAB) was introduced as a sensitive tool to detect cognitive decline in primary care. However, primary care validation is lacking. Therefore, we investigated the accuracy of the CAB in a primary care population.
To investigate the accuracy of the CAB in a primary care population.
Data from 46 individuals with cognitive impairment and 33 individuals who visited the primary care with somatic noncognitive symptoms were analyzed. They were investigated with the MMSE, the CAB, and a battery of neuropsychological tests; they also underwent consultation with a geriatric specialist. The accuracy of the CAB was assessed using c-statistics and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to quantify the binary outcomes ("no cognitive impairment" or "cognitive impairment").
The "cognitive impairment" group was significantly different from the unimpaired group for all the subtests of the CAB. When accuracy was based on binary significant reduction or not in one or several domains of the CAB, the AUC varied between 0.685 and 0.772. However, when a summation or logistic regression of several subcategories was performed, using the numerical values for each subcategory, the AUC was >0.9. For comparison, the AUC for the MMSE was 0.849.
The accuracy of the CAB in a primary care population is poor to good when using binary cutoffs. Accuracy can be improved to high when using a summation or logistic regression of the numerical data of the subcategories. Considering CAB time, lack of adequate age norms, and a good accuracy for the MMSE, implementation of the CAB in primary care is not recommended at present based on the results of this study.
在初级保健中使用了多种认知评估工具,例如简易精神状态检查表(MMSE)和蒙特利尔认知评估量表。认知评估组合(CAB)作为一种在初级保健中检测认知功能减退的敏感工具被引入。然而,缺乏初级保健方面的验证。因此,我们在初级保健人群中研究了CAB的准确性。
在初级保健人群中研究CAB的准确性。
分析了46名认知功能障碍患者和33名因躯体非认知症状就诊于初级保健机构患者的数据。对他们进行了MMSE、CAB和一系列神经心理学测试;他们还接受了老年病专科医生的会诊。使用c统计量评估CAB的准确性,并使用受试者操作特征曲线下面积(AUC)对二元结局(“无认知功能障碍”或“认知功能障碍”)进行量化。
CAB的所有子测试中,“认知功能障碍”组与未受损组存在显著差异。当准确性基于CAB的一个或多个领域是否出现二元显著降低时,AUC在0.685至0.772之间变化。然而,当对几个子类别进行求和或逻辑回归分析时,使用每个子类别的数值,AUC大于0.9。作为比较,MMSE的AUC为0.849。
在初级保健人群中,使用二元临界值时CAB的准确性为差到良好。当使用子类别数值的求和或逻辑回归分析时,准确性可提高到高。考虑到CAB的测试时间、缺乏足够的年龄常模以及MMSE具有良好的准确性,根据本研究结果,目前不建议在初级保健中实施CAB。