Suppr超能文献

用于二级保健环境中痴呆检测的老年人认知减退 informant 问卷 (IQCODE)。

Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) for the detection of dementia within a secondary care setting.

机构信息

Academic Geriatric Medicine, Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Academic Section of Geriatric Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Jul 19;7(7):CD010772. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010772.pub3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of dementia relies on the presence of new-onset cognitive impairment affecting an individual's functioning and activities of daily living. The Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) is a questionnaire instrument, completed by a suitable 'informant' who knows the patient well, designed to assess change in functional performance secondary to cognitive change; it is used as a tool for identifying those who may have dementia. In secondary care there are two specific instances where patients may be assessed for the presence of dementia. These are in the general acute hospital setting, where opportunistic screening may be undertaken, or in specialist memory services where individuals have been referred due to perceived cognitive problems. To ensure an instrument is suitable for diagnostic use in these settings, its test accuracy must be established.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the accuracy of the informant-based questionnaire IQCODE for detection of dementia in a secondary care setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources on the 28th of January 2013: ALOIS (Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group), MEDLINE (Ovid SP), EMBASE (Ovid SP), PsycINFO (Ovid SP), BIOSIS Previews (Thomson Reuters Web of Science), Web of Science Core Collection (includes Conference Proceedings Citation Index) (Thomson Reuters Web of Science), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) and LILACS (BIREME). We also searched sources specific to diagnostic test accuracy: MEDION (Universities of Maastricht and Leuven); DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects - via the Cochrane Library); HTA Database (Health Technology Assessment Database via the Cochrane Library) and ARIF (Birmingham University). We also checked reference lists of relevant studies and reviews, used searches of known relevant studies in PubMed to track related articles, and contacted research groups conducting work on IQCODE for dementia diagnosis to try to find additional studies. We developed a sensitive search strategy; search terms were designed to cover key concepts using several different approaches run in parallel and included terms relating to cognitive tests, cognitive screening and dementia. We used standardised database subject headings such as MeSH terms (in MEDLINE) and other standardised headings (controlled vocabulary) in other databases, as appropriate.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected those studies performed in secondary-care settings, which included (not necessarily exclusively) IQCODE to assess for the presence of dementia and where dementia diagnosis was confirmed with clinical assessment. For the 'secondary care' setting we included all studies which assessed patients in hospital (e.g. acute unscheduled admissions, referrals to specialist geriatric assessment services etc.) and those referred for specialist 'memory' assessment, typically in psychogeriatric services.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We screened all titles generated by electronic database searches, and reviewed abstracts of all potentially relevant studies. Two independent assessors checked full papers for eligibility and extracted data. We determined quality assessment (risk of bias and applicability) using the QUADAS-2 tool, and reporting quality using the STARD tool.

MAIN RESULTS

From 72 papers describing IQCODE test accuracy, we included 13 papers, representing data from 2745 individuals (n = 1413 (51%) with dementia). Pooled analysis of all studies using data presented closest to a cut-off of 3.3 indicated that sensitivity was 0.91 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.94); specificity 0.66 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.75); the positive likelihood ratio was 2.7 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.6) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.14 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.22). There was a statistically significant difference in test accuracy between the general hospital setting and the specialist memory setting (P = 0.019), suggesting that IQCODE performs better in a 'general' setting. We found no significant differences in the test accuracy of the short (16-item) versus the 26-item IQCODE, or in the language of administration. There was significant heterogeneity in the included studies, including a highly varied prevalence of dementia (10.5% to 87.4%). Across the included papers there was substantial potential for bias, particularly around sampling of included participants and selection criteria, which may limit generalisability. There was also evidence of suboptimal reporting, particularly around disease severity and handling indeterminate results, which are important if considering use in clinical practice.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The IQCODE can be used to identify older adults in the general hospital setting who are at risk of dementia and require specialist assessment; it is useful specifically for ruling out those without evidence of cognitive decline. The language of administration did not affect test accuracy, which supports the cross-cultural use of the tool. These findings are qualified by the significant heterogeneity, the potential for bias and suboptimal reporting found in the included studies.

摘要

背景

痴呆的诊断依赖于新出现的认知障碍,影响个体的功能和日常生活活动。认知衰退知情者问卷(IQCODE)是一种问卷工具,由了解患者的合适“知情者”完成,旨在评估认知变化对功能表现的影响;它被用作识别可能患有痴呆症的工具。在二级保健中,有两种特定情况可能需要对患者进行痴呆评估。一种是在综合急性医院环境中,可能会进行机会性筛查,另一种是在专门的记忆服务中,由于认知问题而被转诊的个体。为了确保该工具在这些环境中的诊断使用,必须确定其测试准确性。

目的

确定基于知情者的问卷 IQCODE 在二级保健环境中用于检测痴呆的准确性。

检索方法

我们于 2013 年 1 月 28 日检索了以下来源:ALOIS(Cochrane 痴呆症和认知改善组)、MEDLINE(Ovid SP)、EMBASE(Ovid SP)、PsycINFO(Ovid SP)、BIOSIS Previews(Thomson Reuters Web of Science)、Web of Science 核心合集(包括会议录引文索引)(Thomson Reuters Web of Science)、CINAHL(EBSCOhost)和 LILACS(BIREME)。我们还检索了专门针对诊断测试准确性的来源:MAASTRICHT 大学和 LEUVEN 大学的 MEDION;DARE(通过 Cochrane 图书馆的效果摘要数据库);HTA 数据库(通过 Cochrane 图书馆的健康技术评估数据库)和伯明翰大学的 ARIF。我们还检查了相关研究和综述的参考文献,使用 PubMed 中已知相关研究的搜索来追踪相关文章,并联系正在进行 IQCODE 用于痴呆诊断的研究小组,以尝试找到其他研究。我们制定了一个敏感的搜索策略;搜索术语旨在使用几种不同的方法涵盖关键概念,这些方法并行运行,并包括与认知测试、认知筛查和痴呆相关的术语。我们在适当的情况下使用了标准数据库主题词,如 MEDLINE 中的 MeSH 术语和其他标准主题词(受控词汇)。

选择标准

我们选择了在二级保健环境中进行的研究,其中包括(不一定专门)用于评估痴呆的 IQCODE,并且痴呆的诊断是通过临床评估确认的。对于“二级保健”环境,我们包括评估医院患者的所有研究(例如急性非计划性入院、转诊至专门的老年评估服务等)和专门的“记忆”评估转诊,通常在精神老年科服务中。

数据收集和分析

我们筛选了电子数据库搜索生成的所有标题,并审查了所有潜在相关研究的摘要。两名独立评估者检查了全文的合格性并提取了数据。我们使用 QUADAS-2 工具确定质量评估(偏倚风险和适用性),并使用 STARD 工具报告质量。

主要结果

从描述 IQCODE 测试准确性的 72 篇论文中,我们纳入了 13 篇论文,代表了来自 2745 名个体的数据(n=1413(51%)患有痴呆症)。使用最接近 3.3 截断值的数据进行所有研究的汇总分析表明,敏感性为 0.91(95%CI 0.86 至 0.94);特异性 0.66(95%CI 0.56 至 0.75);阳性似然比为 2.7(95%CI 2.0 至 3.6),阴性似然比为 0.14(95%CI 0.09 至 0.22)。一般医院环境和专门的记忆环境之间的测试准确性存在统计学显著差异(P=0.019),这表明 IQCODE 在“一般”环境中的表现更好。我们没有发现短(16 项)与 26 项 IQCODE 的测试准确性有显著差异,也没有发现语言管理方面的差异。纳入的研究存在显著的异质性,包括痴呆症的患病率差异很大(10.5%至 87.4%)。在纳入的论文中,存在着大量潜在的偏倚,特别是在包括参与者的抽样和选择标准方面,这可能限制了其普遍性。还存在报告质量不佳的证据,特别是在疾病严重程度和处理不确定结果方面,如果考虑在临床实践中使用,则尤为重要。

作者结论

IQCODE 可用于识别综合急性医院环境中患有痴呆症且需要专门评估的老年人;它特别有助于排除那些没有认知能力下降的人。语言管理对测试准确性没有影响,这支持了该工具的跨文化使用。这些发现受到纳入研究中存在的显著异质性、潜在偏倚和报告质量不佳的限制。

相似文献

9
AD-8 for detection of dementia across a variety of healthcare settings.用于在各种医疗环境中检测痴呆症的AD-8量表。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 4;3(3):CD011121. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011121.pub2.

引用本文的文献

6
Frailty Trajectories Preceding Dementia in the US and UK.美国和英国痴呆症之前的衰弱轨迹。
JAMA Neurol. 2025 Jan 1;82(1):61-71. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.3774.

本文引用的文献

1
AD-8 for detection of dementia across a variety of healthcare settings.用于在各种医疗环境中检测痴呆症的AD-8量表。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 4;3(3):CD011121. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011121.pub2.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验