Cost-benefit and discriminant validity of a stepwise dementia case-finding approach in an Asian older adult community.

IF 5.3 3区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
General Psychiatry Pub Date : 2023-10-30 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1136/gpsych-2023-101049
Ting Pang, Binte Xia, Xuhao Zhao, Yaping Zhang, Cheuk Ni Kan, Saima Hilal, Christopher Chen, Narayanaswamy Venketasubramanian, Wong Tien Yin, Ching-Yu Cheng, Changzheng Yuan, Xin Xu
{"title":"Cost-benefit and discriminant validity of a stepwise dementia case-finding approach in an Asian older adult community.","authors":"Ting Pang,&nbsp;Binte Xia,&nbsp;Xuhao Zhao,&nbsp;Yaping Zhang,&nbsp;Cheuk Ni Kan,&nbsp;Saima Hilal,&nbsp;Christopher Chen,&nbsp;Narayanaswamy Venketasubramanian,&nbsp;Wong Tien Yin,&nbsp;Ching-Yu Cheng,&nbsp;Changzheng Yuan,&nbsp;Xin Xu","doi":"10.1136/gpsych-2023-101049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Case-finding is a recommended approach for dementia early detection in the community.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To investigate the discriminant validity and cost-effectiveness of a stepwise dementia case-finding approach in a Singaporean older adult community.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The two-phase study was conducted in the community from 2009 to 2015 in Singapore. A total of 3780 participants (age ≥60 years) completed phase I (a brief cognitive screening); 918 completed phase II and were included in the final analysis. In phase I, all participants were administered the Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT) and the Progressive Forgetfulness Question (PFQ). Those who screened positive on either test were invited to phase II, whereby the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and a formal neuropsychological battery were administered, followed by the research diagnosis of no cognitive impairment, cognitive impairment no dementia (CIND)-Mild (≤2 impaired cognitive domains), CIND-Moderate (>2 impaired domains) or dementia. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were conducted for the different cognitive instruments. All discriminant indices were calculated, including sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (NPV) and accuracy. Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted by estimating the amount of screening time needed and the number of older adults requiring re-evaluation in two case-finding scenarios, ie, with or without preselection by the PFQ.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The stepwise case-finding approach (preselection by the PFQ, then MMSE or MoCA or AMT) showed an excellent NPV (>99%) and accuracy (>86%) for excluding dementia-free cases. Without preselection by the PFQ, screening time for the three cognitive tools were 317.5, 317.5 and 254 hours, with 159, 302 and 175 screen-positive older adults involved in further evaluation. By adopting the stepwise case-finding approach, total screening time were 156.5, 156.5 and 126.2 hours, which decreased by 50.7%, 50.7% and 50.3% as compared with those without preselection. Furthermore, after preselection, only 98, 167 and 145 screen-positive older adults required further evaluation, corresponding to a reduction of 38.4%, 44.7% and 17.1% in the numbers compared with those without preselection.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A stepwise approach for dementia case-finding should be implemented in the community to minimise the time and resources needed for large-scale early detection of dementia.</p>","PeriodicalId":12549,"journal":{"name":"General Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10618984/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"General Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/gpsych-2023-101049","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Case-finding is a recommended approach for dementia early detection in the community.

Aims: To investigate the discriminant validity and cost-effectiveness of a stepwise dementia case-finding approach in a Singaporean older adult community.

Methods: The two-phase study was conducted in the community from 2009 to 2015 in Singapore. A total of 3780 participants (age ≥60 years) completed phase I (a brief cognitive screening); 918 completed phase II and were included in the final analysis. In phase I, all participants were administered the Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT) and the Progressive Forgetfulness Question (PFQ). Those who screened positive on either test were invited to phase II, whereby the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and a formal neuropsychological battery were administered, followed by the research diagnosis of no cognitive impairment, cognitive impairment no dementia (CIND)-Mild (≤2 impaired cognitive domains), CIND-Moderate (>2 impaired domains) or dementia. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were conducted for the different cognitive instruments. All discriminant indices were calculated, including sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (NPV) and accuracy. Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted by estimating the amount of screening time needed and the number of older adults requiring re-evaluation in two case-finding scenarios, ie, with or without preselection by the PFQ.

Results: The stepwise case-finding approach (preselection by the PFQ, then MMSE or MoCA or AMT) showed an excellent NPV (>99%) and accuracy (>86%) for excluding dementia-free cases. Without preselection by the PFQ, screening time for the three cognitive tools were 317.5, 317.5 and 254 hours, with 159, 302 and 175 screen-positive older adults involved in further evaluation. By adopting the stepwise case-finding approach, total screening time were 156.5, 156.5 and 126.2 hours, which decreased by 50.7%, 50.7% and 50.3% as compared with those without preselection. Furthermore, after preselection, only 98, 167 and 145 screen-positive older adults required further evaluation, corresponding to a reduction of 38.4%, 44.7% and 17.1% in the numbers compared with those without preselection.

Conclusions: A stepwise approach for dementia case-finding should be implemented in the community to minimise the time and resources needed for large-scale early detection of dementia.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

亚洲老年人社区逐步痴呆病例发现方法的成本效益和判别有效性。
背景:病例发现是社区早期发现痴呆症的推荐方法。目的:研究新加坡老年人社区逐步痴呆病例发现方法的判别有效性和成本效益。方法:该研究于2009年至2015年在新加坡社区进行。共有3780名参与者(年龄≥60岁)完成了第一阶段(简短的认知筛查);918人完成了第二阶段,并被纳入最终分析。在第一阶段,所有参与者都接受了简短心理测试(AMT)和渐进遗忘问题(PFQ)。那些在任何一项测试中均呈阳性的人被邀请进入第二阶段,进行迷你精神状态检查(MMSE)、蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)和正式的神经心理测试,然后进行无认知障碍、无痴呆(CIND)-轻度(≤2个认知域受损)的研究诊断,CIND中度(>2个受损结构域)或痴呆。对不同的认知工具进行受试者操作特征曲线分析。计算所有判别指标,包括敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值(NPV)和准确性。成本效益分析是通过估计两种病例发现情况下所需的筛查时间和需要重新评估的老年人数量来进行的,结果:逐步病例发现方法(通过PFQ预选,然后是MMSE或MoCA或AMT)在排除无痴呆病例方面显示出优异的NPV(>99%)和准确率(>86%)。在没有PFQ预选的情况下,三种认知工具的筛查时间分别为317.5、317.5和254小时,其中159302和175名筛查呈阳性的老年人参与了进一步评估。采用逐步病例发现法,总筛查时间分别为156.5、156.5和126.2 小时,与未预选组相比分别下降了50.7%、50.7%和50.3%。此外,在预选后,只有98167和145名筛查呈阳性的老年人需要进一步评估,与未经预选的老年人相比,这一数字分别减少了38.4%、44.7%和17.1%。结论:应在社区中实施逐步发现痴呆症病例的方法,以最大限度地减少大规模早期发现痴呆症所需的时间和资源。
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
General Psychiatry
General Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
21.90
自引率
2.50%
发文量
848
期刊介绍: General Psychiatry (GPSYCH), an open-access journal established in 1959, has been a pioneer in disseminating leading psychiatry research. Addressing a global audience of psychiatrists and mental health professionals, the journal covers diverse topics and publishes original research, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, forums on topical issues, case reports, research methods in psychiatry, and a distinctive section on 'Biostatistics in Psychiatry'. The scope includes original articles on basic research, clinical research, community-based studies, and ecological studies, encompassing a broad spectrum of psychiatric interests.
×
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