RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Dementia is a progressive global cognitive impairment syndrome. In 2010, more than 35 million people worldwide were estimated to be living with dementia. Some people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) will progress to dementia but others remain stable or recover full function. There is great interest in finding good predictors of dementia in people with MCI. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the best-known and the most often used short screening tool for providing an overall measure of cognitive impairment in clinical, research and community settings. OBJECTIVES: To determine the accuracy of the Mini Mental State Examination for the early detection of dementia in people with mild cognitive impairment SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS (Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Specialized Register of diagnostic and intervention studies (inception to May 2014); MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1946 to May 2014); EMBASE (OvidSP) (1980 to May 2014); BIOSIS (Web of Science) (inception to May 2014); Web of Science Core Collection, including the Conference Proceedings Citation Index (ISI Web of Science) (inception to May 2014); PsycINFO (OvidSP) (inception to May 2014), and LILACS (BIREME) (1982 to May 2014). We also searched specialized sources of diagnostic test accuracy studies and reviews, most recently in May 2014: MEDION (Universities of Maastricht and Leuven, www.mediondatabase.nl), DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, via the Cochrane Library), HTA Database (Health Technology Assessment Database, via the Cochrane Library), and ARIF (University of Birmingham, UK, www.arif.bham.ac.uk). No language or date restrictions were applied to the electronic searches and methodological filters were not used as a method to restrict the search overall so as to maximize sensitivity. We also checked reference lists of relevant studies and reviews, tracked citations in Scopus and Science Citation Index, used searches of known relevant studies in PubMed to track related articles, and contacted research groups conducting work on MMSE for dementia diagnosis to try to locate possibly relevant but unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered longitudinal studies in which results of the MMSE administered to MCI participants at baseline were obtained and the reference standard was obtained by follow-up over time. We included participants recruited and clinically classified as individuals with MCI under Petersen and revised Petersen criteria, Matthews criteria, or a Clinical Dementia Rating = 0.5. We used acceptable and commonly used reference standards for dementia in general, Alzheimer's dementia, Lewy body dementia, vascular dementia and frontotemporal dementia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We screened all titles generated by the electronic database searches. Two review authors independently assessed the abstracts of all potentially relevant studies. We assessed the identified full papers for eligibility and extracted data to create two by two tables for dementia in general and other dementias. Two authors independently performed quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool. Due to high heterogeneity and scarcity of data, we derived estimates of sensitivity at fixed values of specificity from the model we fitted to produce the summary receiver operating characteristic curve. MAIN RESULTS: In this review, we included 11 heterogeneous studies with a total number of 1569 MCI patients followed for conversion to dementia. Four studies assessed the role of baseline scores of the MMSE in conversion from MCI to all-cause dementia and eight studies assessed this test in conversion from MCI to Alzheimer´s disease dementia. Only one study provided information about the MMSE and conversion from MCI to vascular dementia. For conversion from MCI to dementia in general, the accuracy of baseline MMSE scores ranged from sensitivities of 23% to 76% and specificities from 40% to 94%. In relationship to conversion from MCI to Alzheimer's disease dementia, the accuracy of baseline MMSE scores ranged from sensitivities of 27% to 89% and specificities from 32% to 90%. Only one study provided information about conversion from MCI to vascular dementia, presenting a sensitivity of 36% and a specificity of 80% with an incidence of vascular dementia of 6.2%. Although we had planned to explore possible sources of heterogeneity, this was not undertaken due to the scarcity of studies included in our analysis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our review did not find evidence supporting a substantial role of MMSE as a stand-alone single-administration test in the identification of MCI patients who could develop dementia. Clinicians could prefer to request additional and extensive tests to be sure about the management of these patients. An important aspect to assess in future updates is if conversion to dementia from MCI stages could be predicted better by MMSE changes over time instead of single measurements. It is also important to assess if a set of tests, rather than an isolated one, may be more successful in predicting conversion from MCI to dementia.
Assuntos
Disfunção Cognitiva/complicações , Demência/diagnóstico , Testes de Estado Mental e Demência , Doença de Alzheimer/diagnóstico , Demência/etiologia , Demência Vascular/diagnóstico , Demência Vascular/etiologia , Progressão da Doença , Diagnóstico Precoce , Demência Frontotemporal/diagnóstico , Demência Frontotemporal/etiologia , Humanos , Doença por Corpos de Lewy/diagnóstico , Doença por Corpos de Lewy/etiologia , Testes Neuropsicológicos , Sensibilidade e EspecificidadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Dementia is a progressive global cognitive impairment syndrome. In 2010, more than 35 million people worldwide were estimated to be living with dementia. Some people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) will progress to dementia but others remain stable or recover full function. There is great interest in finding good predictors of dementia in people with MCI. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the best-known and the most often used short screening tool for providing an overall measure of cognitive impairment in clinical, research and community settings. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the MMSE at various thresholds for detecting individuals with baseline MCI who would clinically convert to dementia in general, Alzheimer's disease dementia or other forms of dementia at follow-up. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS (Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Specialized Register of diagnostic and intervention studies (inception to May 2014); MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1946 to May 2014); EMBASE (OvidSP) (1980 to May 2014); BIOSIS (Web of Science) (inception to May 2014); Web of Science Core Collection, including the Conference Proceedings Citation Index (ISI Web of Science) (inception to May 2014); PsycINFO (OvidSP) (inception to May 2014), and LILACS (BIREME) (1982 to May 2014). We also searched specialized sources of diagnostic test accuracy studies and reviews, most recently in May 2014: MEDION (Universities of Maastricht and Leuven, www.mediondatabase.nl), DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, via the Cochrane Library), HTA Database (Health Technology Assessment Database, via the Cochrane Library), and ARIF (University of Birmingham, UK, www.arif.bham.ac.uk). No language or date restrictions were applied to the electronic searches and methodological filters were not used as a method to restrict the search overall so as to maximize sensitivity. We also checked reference lists of relevant studies and reviews, tracked citations in Scopus and Science Citation Index, used searches of known relevant studies in PubMed to track related articles, and contacted research groups conducting work on MMSE for dementia diagnosis to try to locate possibly relevant but unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered longitudinal studies in which results of the MMSE administered to MCI participants at baseline were obtained and the reference standard was obtained by follow-up over time. We included participants recruited and clinically classified as individuals with MCI under Petersen and revised Petersen criteria, Matthews criteria, or a Clinical Dementia Rating = 0.5. We used acceptable and commonly used reference standards for dementia in general, Alzheimer's dementia, Lewy body dementia, vascular dementia and frontotemporal dementia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We screened all titles generated by the electronic database searches. Two review authors independently assessed the abstracts of all potentially relevant studies. We assessed the identified full papers for eligibility and extracted data to create two by two tables for dementia in general and other dementias. Two authors independently performed quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool. Due to high heterogeneity and scarcity of data, we derived estimates of sensitivity at fixed values of specificity from the model we fitted to produce the summary receiver operating characteristic curve. MAIN RESULTS: In this review, we included 11 heterogeneous studies with a total number of 1569 MCI patients followed for conversion to dementia. Four studies assessed the role of baseline scores of the MMSE in conversion from MCI to all-cause dementia and eight studies assessed this test in conversion from MCI to Alzheimer´s disease dementia. Only one study provided information about the MMSE and conversion from MCI to vascular dementia. For conversion from MCI to dementia in general, the accuracy of baseline MMSE scores ranged from sensitivities of 23% to 76% and specificities from 40% to 94%. In relationship to conversion from MCI to Alzheimer's disease dementia, the accuracy of baseline MMSE scores ranged from sensitivities of 27% to 89% and specificities from 32% to 90%. Only one study provided information about conversion from MCI to vascular dementia, presenting a sensitivity of 36% and a specificity of 80% with an incidence of vascular dementia of 6.2%. Although we had planned to explore possible sources of heterogeneity, this was not undertaken due to the scarcity of studies included in our analysis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our review did not find evidence supporting a substantial role of MMSE as a stand-alone single-administration test in the identification of MCI patients who could develop dementia. Clinicians could prefer to request additional and extensive tests to be sure about the management of these patients. An important aspect to assess in future updates is if conversion to dementia from MCI stages could be predicted better by MMSE changes over time instead of single measurements. It is also important to assess if a set of tests, rather than an isolated one, may be more successful in predicting conversion from MCI to dementia.
Assuntos
Disfunção Cognitiva/complicações , Demência/diagnóstico , Entrevista Psiquiátrica Padronizada , Doença de Alzheimer/diagnóstico , Demência Vascular/diagnóstico , Progressão da Doença , Demência Frontotemporal/diagnóstico , Humanos , Doença por Corpos de Lewy/diagnóstico , Testes Neuropsicológicos , Sensibilidade e EspecificidadeRESUMO
Alzheimer's disease dementia (AD dementia) is one of the most common neurodegenerative diseases worldwide, with a growing incidence during the last decades. Clinical diagnosis of cognitive impairment and presence of AD biomarkers have become important issues for early and adequate treatment. We performed a systematic literature search and quality appraisal of AD dementia guidelines, published between 2005 and 2011, which contained diagnostic recommendations on AD dementia. We also analyzed diagnostic recommendations related to the use of brief cognitive tests, neuropsychological evaluation, and AD biomarkers. Of the 537 retrieved references, 15 met the selection criteria. We found that Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE)-II domains such as applicability and editorial independence had the lowest scores. The wide variability on assessment of quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were the main concerns identified regarding diagnostic testing. Although the appropriate methodology for clinical practice guideline development is well known, the quality of diagnostic AD dementia guidelines can be significantly improved.
Assuntos
Doença de Alzheimer/diagnóstico , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Doença de Alzheimer/metabolismo , Biomarcadores/metabolismo , Humanos , Neuroimagem , Testes NeuropsicológicosRESUMO
Introducción: la depresión es una enfermedad de alta prevalencia en adultos mayores. En Colombia su prevalencia se ha descrito entre 1,2 a 12% en mayores que viven en comunidad. Objetivo: estimar la prevalencia de depresión en un muestra de adultos mayores de Bogotá y describir los factores de riesgo psicosocial asociados. Material y métodos: se realizó un estudio de corte transversal observacional-descriptivo, en 889 adultos mayores autónomos. La depresión fue evaluada con el test de depresión geriátrica Yesavage y los factores de riesgo con la sección de acontecimientos vitales del cuestionario Predict. Resultados: el 74% de la muestra estuvo constituida por mujeres, la media de edad fue de 72,51 (DS 9,4) años y la escolaridad promedio en años fue de 7,50 (DS 5,64). Así mismo, se estimó una prevalencia de depresión del 18,6%, siendo mayor en mujeres (20%) y (18%) en sujetos entre 70 y 79 años, los adultos con baja escolaridad sumaron un 43%, y el 22% lo constituyeron personas dependientes económicamente. Por otra parte, se encontró relación entre la depresión y cinco de los factores de riesgo psicosocial conocidos como acontecimientos vitales adversos: insomnio, vivir solo, padecer enfermedades crónicas, haber sufrido una crisis económica, y la muerte de un familiar o amigo cercano en el último año. Conclusión: la prevalencia de depresión en un grupo de personas mayores de la comunidad en Bogotá es más alta que lo descrito previamente en Colombia y por la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS). Programas que reduzcan la soledad en la vejez y protejan a la mujer y a los mayores con menos escolaridad podrían mitigar esta condición.
Introduction: depression is one of the most prevalent diseases in the elderly. In Colombia, the prevalence of depression in this population ranges from 1,2 to 12%. Objective: to estimate the prevalence of depression in a group of independent elderly subjects in Bogota and describe the psychosocial risk factors associated with it. Material and methods: a cross-observational and descriptive study was done. The sample was constituted of 889 autonomous elderly subjects of Bogota city. Depression was assessed by applying the Test of Geriatric Depression-Yesavage-. Besides, the psychosocial risk factors were measured through the life events section, which is part of the Predict Questionnaire. Results: 74% of the sample was made up of women, the mean age was 72,51 years old (DS.9,4) and the average of education was of 7.50 years (DS.5,64). Besides, it was found a prevalence of depression of 18,6%. This prevalence was higher in the women (20%) and elderly between 70 and 79 years old (18%), adults with low education with 43% or 22% in economically dependent people. A relationship between depression and five psychosocial risk factors, known as adverse life events-insomnia, living alone, suffering a chronic disease or economic crisis or the death of the couple, a close friend or a relative. Conclusion: results showed a higher prevalence of depression in this sample in comparison to the findings yielded in previous studies developed in Colombia and the WHO. Programs that help to reduce the long lines protect women and older with less schooling ageing could mitigate the condition.