Seitz Dallas P, Chan Calvin Ch, Newton Hailey T, Gill Sudeep S, Herrmann Nathan, Smailagic Nadja, Nikolaou Vasilis, Fage Bruce A
Department of Psychiatry, Queen's University, 752 King Street West, Kingston, ON, Canada, K7L 4X3.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 22;2(2):CD011415. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011415.pub2.
Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia are becoming increasingly common with the aging of most populations. The majority of individuals with dementia will first present for care and assessment in primary care settings. There is a need for brief dementia screening instruments that can accurately diagnose dementia in primary care settings. The Mini-Cog is a brief, cognitive screening test that is frequently used to evaluate cognition in older adults in various settings.
To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog for diagnosing Alzheimer's disease dementia and related dementias in a primary care setting.
We searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDLINE, Embase and four other databases, initially to September 2012. Since then, four updates to the search were performed using the same search methods, and the most recent was January 2017. We used citation tracking (using the databases' 'related articles' feature, where available) as an additional search method and contacted authors of eligible studies for unpublished data.
We only included studies that evaluated the Mini-Cog as an index test for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia or related forms of dementia when compared to a reference standard using validated criteria for dementia. We only included studies that were conducted in primary care populations.
We extracted and described information on the characteristics of the study participants and study setting. Using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) criteria we evaluated the quality of studies, and we assessed risk of bias and applicability of each study for each domain in QUADAS-2. Two review authors independently extracted information on the true positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives and entered the data into Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5). We then used RevMan 5 to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals. We summarized the sensitivity and specificity of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies in forest plots and also plotted them in a receiver operating characteristic plot. We also created a 'Risk of bias' and applicability concerns graph to summarize information related to the quality of included studies.
There were a total of four studies that met our inclusion criteria, including a total of 1517 total participants. The sensitivity of the Mini-Cog varied between 0.76 to 1.00 in studies while the specificity varied between 0.27 to 0.85. The included studies displayed significant heterogeneity in both methodologies and clinical populations, which did not allow for a meta-analysis to be completed. Only one study (Holsinger 2012) was found to be at low risk of bias on all methodological domains. The results of this study reported that the sensitivity of the Mini-Cog was 0.76 and the specificity was 0.73. We found the quality of all other included studies to be low due to a high risk of bias with methodological limitations primarily in their selection of participants.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a limited number of studies evaluating the accuracy of the Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of dementia in primary care settings. Given the small number of studies, the wide range in estimates of the accuracy of the Mini-Cog, and methodological limitations identified in most of the studies, at the present time there is insufficient evidence to recommend that the Mini-Cog be used as a screening test for dementia in primary care. Further studies are required to determine the accuracy of Mini-Cog in primary care and whether this tool has sufficient diagnostic test accuracy to be useful as a screening test in this setting.
随着大多数人口老龄化,阿尔茨海默病和其他形式的痴呆症正变得越来越普遍。大多数痴呆症患者最初会在初级保健机构接受护理和评估。需要有简短的痴呆症筛查工具,能够在初级保健机构准确诊断痴呆症。简易认知筛查量表(Mini-Cog)是一种简短的认知筛查测试,常用于评估不同环境中老年人的认知情况。
确定在初级保健机构中,简易认知筛查量表诊断阿尔茨海默病性痴呆及相关痴呆症的诊断准确性。
我们检索了Cochrane痴呆与认知改善诊断试验准确性研究注册库、MEDLINE、Embase以及其他四个数据库,最初检索至2012年9月。此后,使用相同的检索方法进行了四次更新检索,最近一次是在2017年1月。我们使用引文跟踪(如有可能,利用数据库的“相关文章”功能)作为额外的检索方法,并联系符合条件研究的作者获取未发表的数据。
我们仅纳入了将简易认知筛查量表作为诊断阿尔茨海默病性痴呆或相关痴呆症的指标性测试,并与使用经过验证的痴呆症标准的参考标准进行比较的研究。我们仅纳入了在初级保健人群中开展的研究。
我们提取并描述了关于研究参与者特征和研究环境的信息。我们使用诊断准确性研究质量评估(QUADAS-2)标准评估研究质量,并评估每项研究在QUADAS-2中每个领域的偏倚风险和适用性。两位综述作者独立提取了真阳性、真阴性、假阳性和假阴性的信息,并将数据录入Review Manager 5(RevMan 5)。然后,我们使用RevMan 5确定敏感性、特异性和95%置信区间。我们在森林图中总结了个体研究中简易认知筛查量表的敏感性和特异性,并在受试者工作特征图中进行绘制。我们还创建了一个“偏倚风险”和适用性问题图,以总结与纳入研究质量相关的信息。
共有四项研究符合我们的纳入标准,总共1517名参与者。在各项研究中,简易认知筛查量表的敏感性在0.76至1.00之间,特异性在0.27至0.85之间。纳入的研究在方法学和临床人群方面均显示出显著的异质性,这使得无法完成荟萃分析。仅一项研究(霍尔辛格,2012年)在所有方法学领域被发现偏倚风险较低。该研究结果报告简易认知筛查量表的敏感性为0.76,特异性为[0.73]。由于主要在参与者选择方面存在方法学局限性导致偏倚风险较高,我们发现所有其他纳入研究的质量较低。
评估简易认知筛查量表在初级保健机构中诊断痴呆症准确性的研究数量有限。鉴于研究数量较少、简易认知筛查量表准确性估计范围广泛以及大多数研究中发现的方法学局限性,目前没有足够的证据推荐将简易认知筛查量表用作初级保健中痴呆症的筛查测试。需要进一步研究以确定简易认知筛查量表在初级保健中的准确性,以及该工具是否具有足够的诊断测试准确性,以便在这种环境中用作筛查测试。