Optimising dementia screening in community-dwelling older adults: A rapid review of brief diagnostic tools in Singapore.

IF 2.5 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Jun Pei Lim, Sabrina Lau, Penny Lun, Jia Ying Tang, Edwin Shih-Yen Chan, Luming Shi, Liang Guo, Yew Yoong Ding, Laura Tay, Reshma A Merchant, Wee Shiong Lim
{"title":"Optimising dementia screening in community-dwelling older adults: A rapid review of brief diagnostic tools in Singapore.","authors":"Jun Pei Lim, Sabrina Lau, Penny Lun, Jia Ying Tang, Edwin Shih-Yen Chan, Luming Shi, Liang Guo, Yew Yoong Ding, Laura Tay, Reshma A Merchant, Wee Shiong Lim","doi":"10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.2024163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Timely detection of dementia enables early access to dementia-specific care services and interventions. Various stakeholders brought together to refine Singapore's dementia care strategy identified a lack of a standardised cognitive screening tool and the absence of a comparative review of existing tools. We hence conducted a rapid review to evaluate the diagnostic performance of brief cognitive screening tools in identifying possible dementia among community-dwelling older adults in Singapore.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Brief cognitive screening tools were defined as interviews or tests administered in ≤5 minutes. Studies performed in Singapore on older adults ≥60 years, which used locally-validated comparators and reported outcomes of clinician-diagnosed dementia were included. Rapid review methodology was used in study screening and selection. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2 tool was used for risk-of-bias assessment. A negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of ≤0.2 was defined a priori as having a moderate effect in shifting post-test probability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen studies were included in qualitative synthesis: 3 studies evaluated self-/informant-based tools only, 4 evaluated performance-based measures only and 7 evaluated combination approaches. Eight-item Informant Interview to Differentiate Aging and Dementia (AD8) was the most studied self-/ informant-based tool. One study found informant AD8 (iAD8) superior to self-rated AD8. Another study found iAD8 superior to Mini-Mental State Examination. Among performance-based measures, Abbreviated Mental Test, Visual Cognitive Assessment Test-Short form version 1 (VCAT-S1), VCAT-S2 and Mini-Cog had LR- <0.2. Minimal improvement of combination approaches compared to iAD8 alone was demonstrated.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our review suggests the limited utility of dementia screening in communities with low dementia prevalence and supports a case-finding approach instead. With a reliable informant, iAD8 alone has sufficient discriminant ability. Further research is needed to specifically assess the diagnostic ability of performance-based tools in community settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":502093,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore","volume":"53 12","pages":"742-753"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.2024163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Timely detection of dementia enables early access to dementia-specific care services and interventions. Various stakeholders brought together to refine Singapore's dementia care strategy identified a lack of a standardised cognitive screening tool and the absence of a comparative review of existing tools. We hence conducted a rapid review to evaluate the diagnostic performance of brief cognitive screening tools in identifying possible dementia among community-dwelling older adults in Singapore.

Method: Brief cognitive screening tools were defined as interviews or tests administered in ≤5 minutes. Studies performed in Singapore on older adults ≥60 years, which used locally-validated comparators and reported outcomes of clinician-diagnosed dementia were included. Rapid review methodology was used in study screening and selection. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2 tool was used for risk-of-bias assessment. A negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of ≤0.2 was defined a priori as having a moderate effect in shifting post-test probability.

Results: Fourteen studies were included in qualitative synthesis: 3 studies evaluated self-/informant-based tools only, 4 evaluated performance-based measures only and 7 evaluated combination approaches. Eight-item Informant Interview to Differentiate Aging and Dementia (AD8) was the most studied self-/ informant-based tool. One study found informant AD8 (iAD8) superior to self-rated AD8. Another study found iAD8 superior to Mini-Mental State Examination. Among performance-based measures, Abbreviated Mental Test, Visual Cognitive Assessment Test-Short form version 1 (VCAT-S1), VCAT-S2 and Mini-Cog had LR- <0.2. Minimal improvement of combination approaches compared to iAD8 alone was demonstrated.

Conclusion: Our review suggests the limited utility of dementia screening in communities with low dementia prevalence and supports a case-finding approach instead. With a reliable informant, iAD8 alone has sufficient discriminant ability. Further research is needed to specifically assess the diagnostic ability of performance-based tools in community settings.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信