Development of a brief test protocol for assessing cognitive change in the peri-operative period in older adults undergoing elective surgery

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2025-03-24 DOI:10.1111/anae.16604
Annerixt Gribnau, Gert J. Geurtsen, Hanna C. Willems, Jeroen Hermanides, Mark L. van Zuylen
{"title":"Development of a brief test protocol for assessing cognitive change in the peri-operative period in older adults undergoing elective surgery","authors":"Annerixt Gribnau, Gert J. Geurtsen, Hanna C. Willems, Jeroen Hermanides, Mark L. van Zuylen","doi":"10.1111/anae.16604","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Many patients are afraid of permanent cognitive impairment after general anaesthesia [<span>1</span>]. However, there is no uniform method to diagnose postoperative neurocognitive disorders extending beyond 1 month after surgery [<span>2</span>]. The gold standard is a time-consuming neuropsychological assessment [<span>3</span>]. We aimed to identify and validate internally the best predictive subset of neuropsychological assessment tests, balancing accuracy and utility suitable for both research and clinical purposes.</p>\n<p>This study used data from a previous study [<span>3</span>]. After ethical approval and informed consent, patients aged ≥ 65 y undergoing elective surgery were enrolled. Patients with hearing impairment, multiple procedures under anaesthesia or pre-existent cognitive impairment were not studied. Neuropsychological assessment was done pre-operatively and 4–8 weeks postoperatively. It covered five cognitive domains, with outcomes for 17 individual subtests and four combined scores (online Supporting Information Appendix S1). Outcomes were reported in T-scores, corrected for age and educational level compared with a healthy Dutch patient group [<span>4</span>]. Missing outcomes were imputed.</p>\n<p>Our previous study used a definition based on composite cognitive domain scores, yielding an 18% incidence of postoperative neurocognitive disorder [<span>3</span>]. However, as predictors would be based on the results of individual tests, we defined postoperative neurocognitive disorder in this analysis as a decline of ≥ 1 SD on ≥ two tests in at least one cognitive domain, or a decline of ≥ 1 SD in total cognitive domain score, aligning with the most used research definition [<span>5</span>]. After checking for multicollinearity, we aimed to create a logistic regression model (online Supporting Information Appendix S2). All 17 individual delta test scores were included, and backward selection based on the Akaike Information Criterion was performed, using different cut-offs. When backward selection included the middle or last subtest from a test, we deemed it necessary to also include the other subtest (e.g. Stroop 1, 2 and 3). When this would make the test protocol too time-consuming, we selected the tests with the lowest p values and their subtests, while also checking AUROC, so time of administration would be acceptable. Internal validation was done using bootstrapping, where AUROC and regression coefficients were corrected uniformly for measured optimism. Calibration was assessed and thresholds determined. Predictions were made using the formula <span data-altimg=\"/cms/asset/ac8d0f76-5631-49e2-8f60-0d81353ffa70/anae16604-math-0001.png\"></span><math altimg=\"urn:x-wiley:00032409:media:anae16604:anae16604-math-0001\" display=\"inline\" location=\"graphic/anae16604-math-0001.png\" overflow=\"scroll\">\n<semantics>\n<mrow>\n<mfrac>\n<mn>1</mn>\n<mrow>\n<mn>1</mn>\n<mo>+</mo>\n<msup>\n<mi>e</mi>\n<mrow>\n<mo>−</mo>\n<mfenced close=\")\" open=\"(\">\n<mrow>\n<msub>\n<mi>β</mi>\n<mn>0</mn>\n</msub>\n<mo>+</mo>\n<msub>\n<mi>β</mi>\n<mn>1</mn>\n</msub>\n<mo>*</mo>\n<mi>x</mi>\n<mn>1</mn>\n<mo>+</mo>\n<mo>…</mo>\n</mrow>\n</mfenced>\n</mrow>\n</msup>\n</mrow>\n</mfrac>\n</mrow>\n$$ \\frac{1}{1+{e}^{-\\left({\\beta}_0+{\\beta_1}^{\\ast }x1+\\dots \\right)}} $$</annotation>\n</semantics></math>. Sensitivity and specificity of the final selected subset were tested against the composite domain definition. Full statistical analyses can be found in online Supporting Information Appendix S3.</p>\n<p>In total, 77 patients had complete data and all baseline characteristics can be found in online Supporting Information Appendix S4. Neuropsychological assessment diagnosed 32 (42%) patients with postoperative neurocognitive disorder. After backward selection the selected test protocol was approximately 30 min and deemed too time-consuming (Table 1). Therefore, we included the three tests with the lowest p values, as this gave the best balance between administration time and AUROC. The final model included the Digit Span Test (forward, backward and sorting), Stroop (1, 2, 3), and Auditory Verbal Learning Test with an approximate duration of 20–24 min and yielded an AUROC of 0.91 (95%CI 0.83–0.98) before and 0.86 (95%CI 0.77–0.97) after internal validation (Table 1). Entering the delta T-scores into the model gave a predicted probability on the presence of postoperative neurocognitive disorder. Calibration is shown in Fig. 1. Thresholds and comparison with the other definition can be found in online Supporting Information Appendix S5.</p>\n<div>\n<header><span>Table 1. </span>Three considered subsets of tests (model A, B, C) and the final testprotocol before and after validation. Predictors are delta test scores of each test (postoperative – pre-operative T-scores).</header>\n<div tabindex=\"0\">\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th colspan=\"3\">Model 1: only tests, lowest AIC</th>\n<th colspan=\"3\">Model 2: only tests, until AIC did not drop with one point</th>\n<th colspan=\"3\">Model 3: including cardiac surgery, lowest AIC</th>\n<th colspan=\"3\">Final model: before internal validation</th>\n<th colspan=\"2\">After internal validation</th>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">Test</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">Coefficient</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">p value</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">Test</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">Coefficient</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">p value</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">Test</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">Coefficient</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">p value</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">Test</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">Coefficient</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">p value</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">Coefficient</th>\n<th style=\"top: 65px;\">p value</th>\n</tr>\n</thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>Intercept</td>\n<td>0.280</td>\n<td>0.566</td>\n<td>Intercept</td>\n<td>0.526</td>\n<td>0.357</td>\n<td>Intercept</td>\n<td>0.280</td>\n<td>0.566</td>\n<td>Intercept</td>\n<td>0.356</td>\n<td>0.3973</td>\n<td>0.356</td>\n<td>0.3973</td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td>TMT A</td>\n<td>-0.063</td>\n<td>0.105</td>\n<td>TMT A</td>\n<td>-0.064</td>\n<td>0.115</td>\n<td>TMT A</td>\n<td>-0.063</td>\n<td>0.105</td>\n<td>Stroop 1</td>\n<td>0.044</td>\n<td>0.4546</td>\n<td>0.031</td>\n<td>0.6058</td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td>TMT B</td>\n<td>-0.097</td>\n<td>0.066</td>\n<td>TMT B</td>\n<td>-0.106</td>\n<td>0.056</td>\n<td>TMT B</td>\n<td>-0.097</td>\n<td>0.066</td>\n<td>Stroop 2</td>\n<td>-0.056</td>\n<td>0.3155</td>\n<td>-0.038</td>\n<td>0.4885</td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Stroop 3</td>\n<td>-0.176</td>\n<td>0.011</td>\n<td>Stroop 1</td>\n<td>0.105</td>\n<td>0.253</td>\n<td>Stroop 3</td>\n<td>-0.176</td>\n<td>0.012</td>\n<td>Stroop 3</td>\n<td>-0.159</td>\n<td>0.0074</td>\n<td>-0.101</td>\n<td>0.0645</td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Digit span sorting</td>\n<td>-0.250</td>\n<td>0.000</td>\n<td>Stroop 3</td>\n<td>-0.192</td>\n<td>0.011</td>\n<td>Digit span sorting</td>\n<td>-0.250</td>\n<td>0.000</td>\n<td>Digit span forward</td>\n<td>-0.030</td>\n<td>0.4916</td>\n<td>-0.021</td>\n<td>0.6351</td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Category fluency professions</td>\n<td>-0.068</td>\n<td>0.150</td>\n<td>Digit span sorting</td>\n<td>-0.271</td>\n<td>0.000</td>\n<td>Category fluency professions</td>\n<td>-0.068</td>\n<td>0.150</td>\n<td>Digit span backward</td>\n<td>0.012</td>\n<td>0.7665</td>\n<td>0.008</td>\n<td>0.8376</td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Letter fluency COWAT</td>\n<td>0.080</td>\n<td>0.089</td>\n<td>Category fluency professions</td>\n<td>-0.075</td>\n<td>0.121</td>\n<td>Letter fluency COWAT</td>\n<td>0.081</td>\n<td>0.089</td>\n<td>Digit span sorting</td>\n<td>-0.195</td>\n<td>0.0002</td>\n<td>-0.135</td>\n<td>0.0112</td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td>VAT</td>\n<td>-0.165</td>\n<td>0.126</td>\n<td>Letter fluency COWAT</td>\n<td>0.097</td>\n<td>0.063</td>\n<td>VAT</td>\n<td>-0.165</td>\n<td>0.126</td>\n<td>AVLT immediate</td>\n<td>-0.021</td>\n<td>0.6769</td>\n<td>-0.015</td>\n<td>0.7736</td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td>AVLT delayed</td>\n<td>-0.143</td>\n<td>0.005</td>\n<td>VAT</td>\n<td>-0.194</td>\n<td>0.098</td>\n<td>AVLT delayed</td>\n<td>-0.143</td>\n<td>0.005</td>\n<td>AVLT delayed</td>\n<td>-0.117</td>\n<td>0.0060</td>\n<td>-0.081</td>\n<td>0.0580</td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td></td>\n<td></td>\n<td></td>\n<td>AVLT delayed</td>\n<td>-0.164</td>\n<td>0.006</td>\n<td></td>\n<td></td>\n<td></td>\n<td></td>\n<td></td>\n<td></td>\n<td></td>\n<td></td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td colspan=\"14\"><b>Performance</b></td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td>AUROC</td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">0.95 (0.90–0.99)</td>\n<td>AUROC</td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">0.949 (0.904–0.993)</td>\n<td>AUROC</td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">0.945 (0.898–0.992)</td>\n<td>AUROC</td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">0.908 (0.835–0.981)</td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">0.86 (0.777–0.967)</td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Pseudo R<sup>2</sup></td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">0.533</td>\n<td>Pseudo R<sup>2</sup></td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">0.543</td>\n<td>Pseudo R<sup>2</sup></td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">0.533</td>\n<td>Pseudo R<sup>2</sup></td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">0.429</td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">0.515 (0.316–0.808)</td>\n</tr>\n<tr>\n<td><b>Duration</b></td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">23–32 min</td>\n<td><b>Duration</b></td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">25–35 min</td>\n<td><b>Duration</b></td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">23–32 min</td>\n<td><b>Duration</b></td>\n<td colspan=\"2\">20–24 min</td>\n<td colspan=\"2\"></td>\n</tr>\n</tbody>\n</table>\n</div>\n<div>\n<ul>\n<li> AIC, Akaike information criterion; AUROC, area under the receiver operating characteristics curve; AVLT, auditory verbal learning test; COWAT, controlled oral word association test; TMT, trail making test; VAT, visual association test. </li>\n</ul>\n</div>\n<div></div>\n</div>\n<figure><picture>\n<source media=\"(min-width: 1650px)\" srcset=\"/cms/asset/3928e731-fcc2-493d-8d8d-c20682493ea1/anae16604-fig-0001-m.jpg\"/><img alt=\"Details are in the caption following the image\" data-lg-src=\"/cms/asset/3928e731-fcc2-493d-8d8d-c20682493ea1/anae16604-fig-0001-m.jpg\" loading=\"lazy\" src=\"/cms/asset/7cd9e42a-0764-46fe-9c4e-a4396c5030ac/anae16604-fig-0001-m.png\" title=\"Details are in the caption following the image\"/></picture><figcaption>\n<div><strong>Figure 1<span style=\"font-weight:normal\"></span></strong><div>Open in figure viewer<i aria-hidden=\"true\"></i><span>PowerPoint</span></div>\n</div>\n<div>Calibration plot of the final selected test protocol using bootstrapping (500 repetitions). Final subset, solid line; ideal subset, dashed line.</div>\n</figcaption>\n</figure>\n<p>We believe we have identified a short test protocol with good properties providing a promising alternative for the current neuropsychological assessment, which can be administered before and after surgery.</p>\n<p>Interestingly, we found a postoperative neurocognitive disorder incidence of 42%, which is relatively high [<span>6, 7</span>]. This might be attributed to the inclusion of patients undergoing cardiac surgery and the definition used in this study. This again emphasises the need for a uniform definition for postoperative neurocognitive disorder and the corresponding diagnostic tool.</p>\n<p>Limitations include the small sample size which might have led to possible overfitting of the data, and part of this study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic which may have led to a higher dropout rate as procedures were cancelled in our vulnerable population. However, this does not appear to be an expression of underlying frailty, as dropouts did not have lower neuropsychological assessment scores or higher ASA physical status classifications.</p>\n<p>In conclusion, this short test protocol is a promising alternative to the extensive neuropsychological assessment. This is initially of interest for research, and we recommend future studies to externally validate these results. Consensus on the precise definition of postoperative neurocognitive disorder and the recommended test protocol should be generated in a multidisciplinary working group.</p>","PeriodicalId":7742,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesia","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.16604","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many patients are afraid of permanent cognitive impairment after general anaesthesia [1]. However, there is no uniform method to diagnose postoperative neurocognitive disorders extending beyond 1 month after surgery [2]. The gold standard is a time-consuming neuropsychological assessment [3]. We aimed to identify and validate internally the best predictive subset of neuropsychological assessment tests, balancing accuracy and utility suitable for both research and clinical purposes.

This study used data from a previous study [3]. After ethical approval and informed consent, patients aged ≥ 65 y undergoing elective surgery were enrolled. Patients with hearing impairment, multiple procedures under anaesthesia or pre-existent cognitive impairment were not studied. Neuropsychological assessment was done pre-operatively and 4–8 weeks postoperatively. It covered five cognitive domains, with outcomes for 17 individual subtests and four combined scores (online Supporting Information Appendix S1). Outcomes were reported in T-scores, corrected for age and educational level compared with a healthy Dutch patient group [4]. Missing outcomes were imputed.

Our previous study used a definition based on composite cognitive domain scores, yielding an 18% incidence of postoperative neurocognitive disorder [3]. However, as predictors would be based on the results of individual tests, we defined postoperative neurocognitive disorder in this analysis as a decline of ≥ 1 SD on ≥ two tests in at least one cognitive domain, or a decline of ≥ 1 SD in total cognitive domain score, aligning with the most used research definition [5]. After checking for multicollinearity, we aimed to create a logistic regression model (online Supporting Information Appendix S2). All 17 individual delta test scores were included, and backward selection based on the Akaike Information Criterion was performed, using different cut-offs. When backward selection included the middle or last subtest from a test, we deemed it necessary to also include the other subtest (e.g. Stroop 1, 2 and 3). When this would make the test protocol too time-consuming, we selected the tests with the lowest p values and their subtests, while also checking AUROC, so time of administration would be acceptable. Internal validation was done using bootstrapping, where AUROC and regression coefficients were corrected uniformly for measured optimism. Calibration was assessed and thresholds determined. Predictions were made using the formula 1 1 + e β 0 + β 1 * x 1 + $$ \frac{1}{1+{e}^{-\left({\beta}_0+{\beta_1}^{\ast }x1+\dots \right)}} $$ . Sensitivity and specificity of the final selected subset were tested against the composite domain definition. Full statistical analyses can be found in online Supporting Information Appendix S3.

In total, 77 patients had complete data and all baseline characteristics can be found in online Supporting Information Appendix S4. Neuropsychological assessment diagnosed 32 (42%) patients with postoperative neurocognitive disorder. After backward selection the selected test protocol was approximately 30 min and deemed too time-consuming (Table 1). Therefore, we included the three tests with the lowest p values, as this gave the best balance between administration time and AUROC. The final model included the Digit Span Test (forward, backward and sorting), Stroop (1, 2, 3), and Auditory Verbal Learning Test with an approximate duration of 20–24 min and yielded an AUROC of 0.91 (95%CI 0.83–0.98) before and 0.86 (95%CI 0.77–0.97) after internal validation (Table 1). Entering the delta T-scores into the model gave a predicted probability on the presence of postoperative neurocognitive disorder. Calibration is shown in Fig. 1. Thresholds and comparison with the other definition can be found in online Supporting Information Appendix S5.

Table 1. Three considered subsets of tests (model A, B, C) and the final testprotocol before and after validation. Predictors are delta test scores of each test (postoperative – pre-operative T-scores).
Model 1: only tests, lowest AIC Model 2: only tests, until AIC did not drop with one point Model 3: including cardiac surgery, lowest AIC Final model: before internal validation After internal validation
Test Coefficient p value Test Coefficient p value Test Coefficient p value Test Coefficient p value Coefficient p value
Intercept 0.280 0.566 Intercept 0.526 0.357 Intercept 0.280 0.566 Intercept 0.356 0.3973 0.356 0.3973
TMT A -0.063 0.105 TMT A -0.064 0.115 TMT A -0.063 0.105 Stroop 1 0.044 0.4546 0.031 0.6058
TMT B -0.097 0.066 TMT B -0.106 0.056 TMT B -0.097 0.066 Stroop 2 -0.056 0.3155 -0.038 0.4885
Stroop 3 -0.176 0.011 Stroop 1 0.105 0.253 Stroop 3 -0.176 0.012 Stroop 3 -0.159 0.0074 -0.101 0.0645
Digit span sorting -0.250 0.000 Stroop 3 -0.192 0.011 Digit span sorting -0.250 0.000 Digit span forward -0.030 0.4916 -0.021 0.6351
Category fluency professions -0.068 0.150 Digit span sorting -0.271 0.000 Category fluency professions -0.068 0.150 Digit span backward 0.012 0.7665 0.008 0.8376
Letter fluency COWAT 0.080 0.089 Category fluency professions -0.075 0.121 Letter fluency COWAT 0.081 0.089 Digit span sorting -0.195 0.0002 -0.135 0.0112
VAT -0.165 0.126 Letter fluency COWAT 0.097 0.063 VAT -0.165 0.126 AVLT immediate -0.021 0.6769 -0.015 0.7736
AVLT delayed -0.143 0.005 VAT -0.194 0.098 AVLT delayed -0.143 0.005 AVLT delayed -0.117 0.0060 -0.081 0.0580
AVLT delayed -0.164 0.006
Performance
AUROC 0.95 (0.90–0.99) AUROC 0.949 (0.904–0.993) AUROC 0.945 (0.898–0.992) AUROC 0.908 (0.835–0.981) 0.86 (0.777–0.967)
Pseudo R2 0.533 Pseudo R2 0.543 Pseudo R2 0.533 Pseudo R2 0.429 0.515 (0.316–0.808)
Duration 23–32 min Duration 25–35 min Duration 23–32 min Duration 20–24 min
  • AIC, Akaike information criterion; AUROC, area under the receiver operating characteristics curve; AVLT, auditory verbal learning test; COWAT, controlled oral word association test; TMT, trail making test; VAT, visual association test.
Abstract Image
Figure 1
Open in figure viewerPowerPoint
Calibration plot of the final selected test protocol using bootstrapping (500 repetitions). Final subset, solid line; ideal subset, dashed line.

We believe we have identified a short test protocol with good properties providing a promising alternative for the current neuropsychological assessment, which can be administered before and after surgery.

Interestingly, we found a postoperative neurocognitive disorder incidence of 42%, which is relatively high [6, 7]. This might be attributed to the inclusion of patients undergoing cardiac surgery and the definition used in this study. This again emphasises the need for a uniform definition for postoperative neurocognitive disorder and the corresponding diagnostic tool.

Limitations include the small sample size which might have led to possible overfitting of the data, and part of this study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic which may have led to a higher dropout rate as procedures were cancelled in our vulnerable population. However, this does not appear to be an expression of underlying frailty, as dropouts did not have lower neuropsychological assessment scores or higher ASA physical status classifications.

In conclusion, this short test protocol is a promising alternative to the extensive neuropsychological assessment. This is initially of interest for research, and we recommend future studies to externally validate these results. Consensus on the precise definition of postoperative neurocognitive disorder and the recommended test protocol should be generated in a multidisciplinary working group.

开发一种评估老年人择期手术围手术期认知变化的简短测试方案
许多患者担心全身麻醉后会出现永久性认知障碍[1]。然而,目前还没有统一的方法来诊断术后超过一个月的神经认知障碍[2]。金标准是耗时的神经心理学评估[3]。我们的目标是找出并在内部验证神经心理评估测试的最佳预测子集,同时兼顾适用于研究和临床目的的准确性和实用性。在获得伦理批准和知情同意后,年龄≥ 65 岁的择期手术患者被纳入研究。有听力障碍、多次麻醉手术或预先存在认知障碍的患者不在研究范围内。神经心理学评估在术前和术后 4-8 周进行。评估涵盖五个认知领域,包括 17 项单项测试和 4 项综合评分(在线辅助信息附录 S1)。结果以 T 分数报告,并与荷兰健康患者组[4]进行了年龄和教育水平校正。我们之前的研究采用了基于认知领域综合评分的定义,结果显示术后神经认知障碍的发生率为 18%[3]。然而,由于预测因素将基于单项测试结果,我们在本分析中将术后神经认知障碍定义为至少一个认知领域的两项测试结果下降≥1 SD,或认知领域总分下降≥1 SD,这与最常用的研究定义一致[5]。在检查了多重共线性后,我们建立了一个逻辑回归模型(在线辅助信息附录 S2)。我们纳入了所有 17 个个体的 delta 测试得分,并根据 Akaike 信息标准进行了后向选择,采用了不同的截止值。当后向选择包括测试的中间或最后一个子测试时,我们认为有必要同时包括其他子测试(如 Stroop 1、2 和 3)。如果这样做会使测试方案过于耗时,我们就会选择 p 值最低的测试及其子测试,同时也会检查 AUROC,这样管理时间就可以接受了。内部验证采用自举法进行,其中AUROC和回归系数根据测得的乐观程度进行统一校正。对校准进行了评估,并确定了阈值。预测公式为 11+e-β0+β1*x1+...$$ \frac{1}{1+{e}^{-\left({\beta}_0+{\beta_1}^{\ast }x1+\dots \right)}} $$。最终选定子集的灵敏度和特异性根据复合领域定义进行了测试。完整的统计分析见在线辅助信息附录 S3.共有 77 名患者拥有完整的数据,所有基线特征见在线辅助信息附录 S4。神经心理学评估诊断出 32 例(42%)患者患有术后神经认知障碍。经过逆向选择,所选测试方案耗时约 30 分钟,被认为过于耗时(表 1)。因此,我们纳入了 p 值最低的三个测试,因为这样可以在管理时间和 AUROC 之间取得最佳平衡。最终的模型包括数字跨度测验(正向、反向和排序)、Stroop(1、2、3)和听觉言语学习测验,时间大约为 20-24 分钟,内部验证前的 AUROC 为 0.91(95%CI 0.83-0.98),内部验证后的 AUROC 为 0.86(95%CI 0.77-0.97)(表 1)。将 delta T scores 输入模型可预测术后出现神经认知障碍的概率。校准结果如图 1 所示。阈值以及与其他定义的比较见在线辅助信息附录 S5。验证前后的三个测试子集(模型 A、B、C)和最终测试方案。模型 1:仅测试,AIC 最低模型 2:仅测试,直到 AIC 不降一分模型 3:包括心脏手术,AIC 最低最终模型:内部验证前内部验证后测试系数p 值测试系数p 值测试系数p 值测试系数p 值截距0.2800.566Intercept0.5260.357Intercept0.2800.566Intercept0.3560.39730.3560.3973TMT A-0.0630.105TMT A-0.0640.115TMT A-0.0630.105Stroop 10.0440.45460.0310.6058TMT B-0.0970.066TMT B-0.1060.056TMT B-0.0970.066Stroop 2-0.0560.3155-0.0380.4885Stroop 3-0.1760.011Stroop 10.1050.253Stroop 3-0.1760.012Stroop 3-0.1590.0074-0.1010.0645Digit span sorting-0.2500.000Stroop 3-0. 7736AVLT延迟-0.1430.005VAT-0.1940.098AVLT延迟-0.1430.005AVLT延迟-0.1170.0060-0.0810.0580AVLT延迟-0.1640.006成绩AUROC0.95(0.90-0.99)AUROC0.949(0.904-0.993)AUROC0.945(0.898-0.992)AUROC0.908(0.835-0.981)0.86(0.777-0.967)伪 R20.533伪 R20.543伪 R20.533伪 R20.4290.515(0.316-0.808)Duration23-32 minDuration25-35 minDuration23-32 minDuration20-24 min AIC, Akaike information criterion; AUROC, area under the receiver operating characteristics curve; AVLT, auditory verbal learning test; COWAT, controlled oral word association test; TMT, trail making test; VAT, visual association test.图 1在图形浏览器中打开PowerPoint使用引导法(500 次重复)绘制的最终选定测试方案校准图。我们相信,我们已经找到了一个具有良好特性的简短测试方案,为目前的神经心理学评估提供了一个很有前途的替代方案,它可以在手术前后进行。有趣的是,我们发现术后神经认知障碍的发生率为 42%,相对较高[6, 7]。有趣的是,我们发现术后神经认知障碍的发生率为 42%,相对较高[6, 7]。这可能是由于纳入了接受心脏手术的患者以及本研究中使用的定义所致。局限性包括样本量较小,可能导致数据过度拟合,而且本研究的部分内容是在 COVID-19 大流行期间进行的,这可能会导致我们的易感人群因手术取消而导致较高的辍学率。不过,这似乎并不是潜在虚弱的表现,因为辍学者的神经心理评估得分并不低,也没有较高的 ASA 身体状况分类。我们建议未来的研究对这些结果进行外部验证。术后神经认知障碍的准确定义和推荐的测试方案应由多学科工作组达成共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Anaesthesia
Anaesthesia 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
21.20
自引率
9.30%
发文量
300
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The official journal of the Association of Anaesthetists is Anaesthesia. It is a comprehensive international publication that covers a wide range of topics. The journal focuses on general and regional anaesthesia, as well as intensive care and pain therapy. It includes original articles that have undergone peer review, covering all aspects of these fields, including research on equipment.
×
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