中国全科医学 ›› 2024, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (32): 4066-4076.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2023.0873

所属专题: 脑健康最新研究合辑

• 医学循证 • 上一篇    下一篇

卒中后认知障碍评估工具筛查准确性的Meta分析

马玉霞1,2, 杨依依1, 魏晓琴1, 陈燕茹1, 秦江霞1, 袁月1, 陈雅婧1, 吴银瓶3, 韩琳1,4,*()   

  1. 1.730011 甘肃省兰州市,兰州大学护理学院循证护理中心
    2.730000 甘肃省兰州市,兰州大学第一临床医学院
    3.730030 甘肃省兰州市,兰州大学第二医院肿瘤内科
    4.730000 甘肃省兰州市,甘肃省人民医院护理部
  • 收稿日期:2024-03-16 修回日期:2024-05-19 出版日期:2024-11-15 发布日期:2024-08-08
  • 通讯作者: 韩琳

  • 作者贡献:

    马玉霞、杨依依、陈燕茹进行文章的构思与设计;马玉霞、杨依依、魏晓琴进行数据整理;杨依依、魏晓琴进行文献检索、筛查和统计学处理;杨依依、魏晓琴、秦江霞、袁月、陈雅婧进行结果的分析与解释,论文的修订;马玉霞、杨依依负责撰写论文;吴银萍、韩琳负责文章的质量控制及审核;马玉霞、韩琳对文章整体负责、行政或技术材料的支持。

  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金资助项目(72274087); 甘肃省自然科学基金资助项目(22JR5RA218); 甘肃省重点研发计划(23YFFA0006); 中华医学会基金(20-374); 兰州大学护理学院科研基金(LZUSON202002); 兰州市城关区科技局项目(2022SHFZ0002); 兰州市卫生科技项目(2021003)

The Accuracy of Screening for Post-stroke Cognitive Impairment Assessment Tools: a Meta-analysis

MA Yuxia1,2, YANG Yiyi1, WEI Xiaoqin1, CHEN Yanru1, QIN Jiangxia1, YUAN Yue1, CHEN Yajing1, WU Yinping3, HAN Lin1,4,*()   

  1. 1. Center for Evidence-based Nursing, School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730011, China
    2. The First School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China
    3. Department of Medical Oncology, the Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730030, China
    4. Department of Nursing, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou 730000, China
  • Received:2024-03-16 Revised:2024-05-19 Published:2024-11-15 Online:2024-08-08
  • Contact: HAN Lin

摘要: 背景 卒中后认知障碍(PSCI)给患者及其家庭带来沉重的负担,早期识别及干预有助于延缓PSCI的发生及进展,因此,使用准确的神经心理评估工具对PSCI进行筛查,对于患者的管理和治疗至关重要。 目的 采用Meta分析的方法评价PSCI筛查工具的筛查准确性,为准确筛查PSCI提供依据。 方法 检索数据库中国知网、维普网、万方数据知识服务平台、中国生物医学文献服务系统、PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane Library中有关PSCI筛查工具的诊断性试验研究,检索日期为建库至2022年12月。2位研究者各自筛选文献、提取数据、评估偏倚风险。采用Stata 17.0软件分析数据。 结果 共纳入57篇文献,包含12 113例患者,报告了7种PSCI筛查工具:美国国立神经疾病和卒中研究院-加拿大卒中网5-min测验(NINDS-CSN 5-min测验)、蒙特利尔认知评估量表(MoCA)、简易精神状况检查量表(MMSE)、老年认知功能减退知情者问卷(IQCODE)、阿登布鲁克认知能力检查-修订版(ACE-R)、认知功能电话问卷修订版(TICS-m)、5分钟蒙特利尔评估(MoCA-5 min)。Meta分析结果显示:MoCA筛查PSCI的合并灵敏度及特异度分别为0.84(95%CI=0.80~0.87)和0.74(95%CI=0.67~0.80),合并AUC为0.87(95%CI=0.84~0.90);MMSE筛查PSCI的合并灵敏度及特异度为0.73(95%CI=0.67~0.79)和0.76(95%CI=0.69~0.82),合并AUC为0.81(95%CI=0.77~0.84);IQCODE筛查PSCI的合并灵敏度及特异度为0.73(95%CI=0.48~0.89)和0.95(95%CI=0.75~0.99),合并AUC为0.91(95%CI=0.88~0.93);NINDS-CSN 5-min测验筛查PSCI的合并灵敏度及特异度为0.83(95%CI=0.78~0.87)、0.69(95%CI=0.60~0.76),合并AUC为0.85(95%CI=0.81~0.88);ACE-R筛查PSCI的合并灵敏度及特异度为0.90(95%CI=0.80~0.95)、0.61(95%CI=0.19~0.91),合并AUC为0.90(95%CI=0.87~0.92);TICS-m筛查PSCI的合并灵敏度及特异度为0.84(95%CI=0.75~0.91)、0.67(95%CI=0.61~0.74),合并AUC为0.66(95%CI=0.60~0.71)。 结论 IQCODE和ACE-R的合并AUC较高,且IQCODE具有较高的合并特异度,ACE-R具有较高的合并灵敏度,故IQCODE和ACE-R是较为准确的PSCI筛查工具。因IQCODE和ACE-R纳入文献数量有限,以上结论仍需多中心、大样本研究予以验证。

关键词: 卒中后认知障碍, 筛查工具, Meta分析, 诊断性试验

Abstract:

Background

Post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) brings a heavy burden to patients and their families. An early recognition and intervention can help delay the occurrence and development of PSCI. Therefore, the use of accurate neuropsychological assessment tools to screen for PSCI is essential for the management and treatment of PSCI.

Objective

To analyze the screening accuracy of assessment tools for PSCI by meta-analysis, thus providing references for an accurate screening of PSCI.

Methods

Diagnostic trials on screening tools of PSCI published from the establishment of the database to December 2022 were searched in CNKI, VIP, Wanfang Data, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library. Two researchers respectively screened literatures, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Stata 17.0 software was used to analyze the data.

Results

A total of 57 articles were included, involving 7 assessment tools [the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke-Canadian Stroke Network 5-Minute Battery (NINDS-CSN 5-Minutes), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE), the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R), the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status Modified (TICS-m) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment 5-minute protocol (MoCA-5 min) ] to screen 12 113 patients. Meta-analysis results showed that the combined sensitivity and specificity of MoCA in screening PSCI were 0.84 (95%CI=0.80-0.87) and 0.74 (95%CI=0.67-0.80), respectively, with a combined area under the curve (AUC) of 0.87 (95%CI=0.84-0.90). The combined sensitivity and specificity of MMSE in screening PSCI were 0.73 (95%CI=0.67-0.79) and 0.76 (95%CI=0.69-0.82), respectively, with a combined AUC of 0.81 (95%CI=0.77-0.84). The combined sensitivity and specificity of IQCODE in screening PSCI were 0.73 (95%CI=0.48-0.89) and 0.95 (95%CI=0.75-0.99), respectively, with a combined AUC of 0.91 (95%CI=0.88-0.93). The combined sensitivity and specificity of the NINDS-CSN 5-min in screening PSCI were 0.83 (95%CI=0.78-0.87) and 0.69 (95%CI=0.60-0.76), respectively, with a combined AUC of 0.85 (95%CI=0.81-0.88). The combined sensitivity and specificity of the ACE-R in screening PSCI were 0.90 (95%CI=0.80-0.95) and 0.61 (95%CI=0.19-0.91), respectively, with a combined AUC of 0.90 (95%CI=0.87-0.92). The combined sensitivity and specificity of TICS-m in screening PSCI were 0.84 (95%CI=0.75-0.91) and 0.67 (95%CI=0.61-0.74), respectively, with a combined AUC of 0.66 (95%CI=0.60-0.71) .

Conclusion

The combined AUC of IQCODE and ACE-R is larger, and the former as a higher combined specificity and the latter has a higher combined sensitivity. Therefore, IQCODE and ACE-R are optimal assessment tools to accurately screen PSCI. Due to the limited number of literatures reporting the IQCODE and ACE-R in screening PSCI, our conclusions still need to be validated by multicenter and large-sample studies.

Key words: Post-stroke cognitive impairment, Screening tools, Meta-analysis, Diagnostic test

中图分类号: