The diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog screening tool for the detection of cognitive impairment-A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Mini-Cog is a rapid screening tool that can be administered to older adults to detect cognitive impairment (CI); however, the accuracy of the Mini-Cog to detect CI for older patients in various healthcare settings is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog to screen for cognitive impairment in older patients across different healthcare settings. METHODS/DESIGN: We searched nine electronic databases (including MEDLINE, Embase) from inception to January 2023. We included studies with patients ≥60 years old undergoing screening for cognitive impairment using the Mini-Cog across all healthcare settings. A cut-off of ≤ 2/5 was used to classify dementia, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and cognitive impairment (defined as either MCI or dementia) across various settings. The diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog was assessed against gold standard references such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). A bivariate random-effects model was used to estimate accuracy and diagnostic ability. The risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-2 criteria. RESULTS: The systematic search resulted in 4,265 articles and 14 studies were included for analysis. To detect dementia (six studies, n = 4772), the Mini-Cog showed 76% sensitivity and 83% specificity. To detect MCI (two studies, n = 270), it showed 84% sensitivity and 79% specificity. To detect CI (eight studies, n = 2152), it had 67% sensitivity and 83% specificity. In the primary care setting, to detect either MCI, dementia, or CI (eight studies, n = 5620), the Mini-Cog demonstrated 73% sensitivity and 84% specificity. Within the secondary care setting (seven studies, n = 1499), the Mini-Cog to detect MCI, dementia or CI demonstrated 73% sensitivity and 76% specificity. A high or unclear risk of bias persisted in the patient selection and timing domain. CONCLUSIONS: The Mini-Cog is a quick and freely available screening tool and has high sensitivity and specificity to screen for CI in older adults across various healthcare settings. It is a practical screening tool for use in time-sensitive and resource-limited healthcare settings.

Evaluating the quality of systematic reviews of comparative studies in autograft-based anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the AMSTAR-2 tool: A systematic umbrella review.

PURPOSE: There remains a lack of consensus around autograft selection in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), though there is a large body of overlapping systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Systematic reviews and their methodological quality were aimed to be further assessed, using a validated tool known as assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR-2). METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL were searched from inception to 23 April 2023 for systematic reviews (with/without meta-analysis) comparing primary ACLR autografts. A final quality rating from AMSTAR-2 was provided for each study ('critically low', 'low', 'moderate' or 'high' quality). Correlational analyses were conducted for ratings in relation to study characteristics. RESULTS: Two thousand five hundred and ninety-eight studies were screened, and 50 studies were ultimately included. Twenty-four studies (48%) were rated as 'critically low', 17 (34%) as 'low', seven (14%) as 'moderate' and two (4%) as 'high' quality. The least followed domains were reporting on sources of funding (1/50 studies), the impact of risk of bias on results of meta-analyses (11/36 studies) and publication bias (17/36 studies). There was a significant increase in the frequency of studies graded as 'moderate' compared to 'low' or 'critically low' quality over time (p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: The methodological quality of systematic reviews comparing autografts in ACLR is low, with many studies being rated lower due to commonly absent aspects of systematic review methodology such as investigating sources of funding and publication bias. More recent studies were generally more likely to be of higher quality. Authors are advised to consult AMSTAR-2 prior to conducting systematic reviews in ACLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

High rates of return to sport following management of osteochondritis dissecans of the femoral trochlea: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To summarize management strategies and associated clinical outcomes in patients with osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) of the femoral trochlea. METHODS: Three databases were searched from inception to 2 October 2023, for studies describing outcomes posttreatment for femoral trochlear OCD. The authors adhered to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses and revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews guidelines as well as the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data on demographics, injury characteristics, and operative details were extracted. Outcomes included patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, and revision and return to sport (RTS) rates. RESULTS: Twenty studies comprising 105 patients (119 knees) were included. Females comprised 10.1% (range: 0%-100%) of patients and the mean age of patients was 14.5 (range: 11-28) years. A total of 89 (74.7%) of knees received operative management, with 28 of 34 (82.4%) known open procedures being open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), and nine of 29 (31%) known arthroscopic procedures receiving arthroscopic reduction internal fixation (ARIF) or drilling. Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee scores in 20 patients each ranged from 93.4 to 100 and 74.7 to 96.6, respectively. The revision rate for operative procedures was 9.0%, and the overall RTS rate was 93.3%. CONCLUSION: There is very little high quality evidence investigating patients with femoral trochlear OCD lesions. Drilling, ARIF, and ORIF were the most common surgical options for this patient population. Patients treated with either nonoperative or operative management returned to sport at a high rate, and those requiring operative management had a low revision rate. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

Frequency of postoperative cognitive dysfunction after non-cardiac surgery and its impact on functional outcomes: protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Older surgical candidates are at increased risk of a phenomenon known as postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD). Several studies have looked at the incidence of POCD at different time points following surgery, using different study methods. Fewer have assessed whether changes in cognition after surgery are attributable to surgery and how they impact patient function and quality of life. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise and appraise studies addressing any of the following research questions (RQs): (RQ1) what is the frequency of POCD after non-cardiac surgery?; (RQ2) is non-cardiac surgery associated with an increased risk of cognitive decline?; (RQ3) is POCD after non-cardiac surgery associated with patient-important outcomes? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. Three electronic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO and EMBASE) will be systematically searched from their inception date. Identified studies will be screened by two reviewers for eligibility using Covidence, and data will be extracted into a standardised electronic form. We will evaluate methodological quality of included studies using the Quality In Prognosis Studies and its adaptation to the overall prognosis question, and the CLARITY risk of bias for cohort and case-control studies. For RQ1, we will estimate an average POCD frequency at different time points by performing a meta-analysis of included studies when appropriate. For RQ2 and RQ3, we will extract and meta-analyse the effect measures for the association of surgery with cognitive decline when compared with the non-surgical comparator, and association of cognitive changes with functional changes, quality of life and other patient-important outcomes based on available evidence. We will narratively summarise and discuss the different methods implemented in the existing studies to answer the three RQs, and when meta-analysis is deemed infeasible, we will qualitatively report the results of the included studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project involves the collection and analysis of data from previously published studies and therefore does not require ethics approval. We plan to present the findings of this research project at peer-reviewed conferences and publish the results in peer-reviewed journals. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022370674.

Acute mental health service use in adolescents with suicidal thoughts and behaviours: Impact on outpatient care.

INTRODUCTION: Youth with suicidal thoughts and behaviours often present to acute emergency care settings for assessment. Timely outpatient follow up may reduce return acute care visits. The primary aim of our study was to describe clinical and contextual differences between youth who do and do not use acute care once connected to outpatient services. METHODS: A 24-month retrospective chart review of suicidal youth aged 13-16 (n = 45) presenting for outpatient mental health treatment. Youth who used acute services during the study period (ASU) or did not (non-ASU) were compared on demographic, risk profile, and mental health service use. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 14.6 years (73% female). Suicide risk profile at baseline did not differ between groups, but was significantly higher in ASU youth at 24 months. There were more youth in service at the end of the study period in the ASU group compared to the non-ASU group (11% vs 55%). CONCLUSION: Youth who do continue to access acute services may be at higher risk of suicidality even after outpatient treatment. Although it is unclear whether this is linked to outpatient engagement, it raises further questions about this population and how they respond to community based mental healthcare.