Brief Cognitive Tests for Distinguishing Clinical Alzheimer-Type Dementia From Mild Cognitive Impairment or Normal Cognition in Older Adults With Suspected Cognitive Impairment.

Cognition Cognitive impairment Cohort studies Dementia Elderly Longitudinal studies Memory recall Retrospective studies Sensitivity Specificity

Journal

Annals of internal medicine
ISSN: 1539-3704
Titre abrégé: Ann Intern Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372351

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
19 05 2020
Historique:
pubmed: 28 4 2020
medline: 2 9 2020
entrez: 28 4 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The accuracy and harms of brief cognitive tests for identifying clinical Alzheimer-type dementia (CATD) are uncertain. To summarize evidence on accuracy and harms of brief cognitive tests for CATD in older adults with suspected cognitive impairment. Electronic bibliographic databases (from inception to November 2019) and systematic review bibliographies. English-language, controlled observational studies in older adults that evaluated the accuracy of brief cognitive tests (standalone tests; memory, executive function, and language tests; and brief multidomain batteries) for distinguishing CATD from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or normal cognition as defined by established diagnostic criteria. Studies with low or medium risk of bias (ROB) were analyzed. Two reviewers rated ROB. One reviewer extracted data; the other verified extraction accuracy. Fifty-seven studies met analysis criteria. Many brief, single cognitive tests were highly sensitive and specific for distinguishing CATD from normal cognition. These included standalone tests (clock-drawing test, median sensitivity 0.79 and specificity 0.88 [8 studies]; Mini-Mental State Examination, 0.88 and 0.94 [7 studies]; Montreal Cognitive Assessment, 0.94 and 0.94 [2 studies]; and Brief Alzheimer Screen, 0.92 and 0.97 [1 study]), memory tests (list delayed recall, 0.89 and 0.94 [5 studies]), and language tests (category fluency, 0.92 and 0.89 [9 studies]). Accuracy was lower in distinguishing mild CATD from normal cognition and distinguishing CATD from MCI. No studies reported on testing harms. Studies were small. Few test metrics were evaluated by multiple studies. Few studies directly compared different tests, scores, cut points, or test combinations. Many brief, single cognitive tests accurately distinguish CATD from normal cognition in older adults but are less accurate in distinguishing mild CATD from normal cognition or CATD from MCI. No studies reported on testing harms. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018117897).

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The accuracy and harms of brief cognitive tests for identifying clinical Alzheimer-type dementia (CATD) are uncertain.
PURPOSE
To summarize evidence on accuracy and harms of brief cognitive tests for CATD in older adults with suspected cognitive impairment.
DATA SOURCES
Electronic bibliographic databases (from inception to November 2019) and systematic review bibliographies.
STUDY SELECTION
English-language, controlled observational studies in older adults that evaluated the accuracy of brief cognitive tests (standalone tests; memory, executive function, and language tests; and brief multidomain batteries) for distinguishing CATD from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or normal cognition as defined by established diagnostic criteria. Studies with low or medium risk of bias (ROB) were analyzed.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two reviewers rated ROB. One reviewer extracted data; the other verified extraction accuracy.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Fifty-seven studies met analysis criteria. Many brief, single cognitive tests were highly sensitive and specific for distinguishing CATD from normal cognition. These included standalone tests (clock-drawing test, median sensitivity 0.79 and specificity 0.88 [8 studies]; Mini-Mental State Examination, 0.88 and 0.94 [7 studies]; Montreal Cognitive Assessment, 0.94 and 0.94 [2 studies]; and Brief Alzheimer Screen, 0.92 and 0.97 [1 study]), memory tests (list delayed recall, 0.89 and 0.94 [5 studies]), and language tests (category fluency, 0.92 and 0.89 [9 studies]). Accuracy was lower in distinguishing mild CATD from normal cognition and distinguishing CATD from MCI. No studies reported on testing harms.
LIMITATIONS
Studies were small. Few test metrics were evaluated by multiple studies. Few studies directly compared different tests, scores, cut points, or test combinations.
CONCLUSION
Many brief, single cognitive tests accurately distinguish CATD from normal cognition in older adults but are less accurate in distinguishing mild CATD from normal cognition or CATD from MCI. No studies reported on testing harms.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018117897).

Identifiants

pubmed: 32340040
pii: 2765189
doi: 10.7326/M19-3889
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S. Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

678-687

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Auteurs

Laura S Hemmy (LS)

Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System and University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota (L.S.H., B.C.T., T.J.W., H.A.F.).

Eric J Linskens (EJ)

Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota (E.J.L., P.C.S., M.A.M., N.L.G.).

Pombie C Silverman (PC)

Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota (E.J.L., P.C.S., M.A.M., N.L.G.).

Margaret A Miller (MA)

Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota (E.J.L., P.C.S., M.A.M., N.L.G.).

Kristine M C Talley (KMC)

University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota (K.M.T., J.M.O., M.B.).

Brent C Taylor (BC)

Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System and University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota (L.S.H., B.C.T., T.J.W., H.A.F.).

Jeannine M Ouellette (JM)

University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota (K.M.T., J.M.O., M.B.).

Nancy L Greer (NL)

Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota (E.J.L., P.C.S., M.A.M., N.L.G.).

Timothy J Wilt (TJ)

Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System and University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota (L.S.H., B.C.T., T.J.W., H.A.F.).

Mary Butler (M)

University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota (K.M.T., J.M.O., M.B.).

Howard A Fink (HA)

Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System and University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota (L.S.H., B.C.T., T.J.W., H.A.F.).

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH