对阿尔茨海默病引起的轻度认知障碍和痴呆患者日常生活工具性活动的评估:塞尔维亚版阿姆斯特丹iadl问卷的诊断准确性

V. Milošević, M. Malobabic, Eva Antić, Aleksandra Aracki Trenkić, D. Stojanov, J. Bašić
{"title":"对阿尔茨海默病引起的轻度认知障碍和痴呆患者日常生活工具性活动的评估:塞尔维亚版阿姆斯特丹iadl问卷的诊断准确性","authors":"V. Milošević, M. Malobabic, Eva Antić, Aleksandra Aracki Trenkić, D. Stojanov, J. Bašić","doi":"10.22190/fumb221215009m","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To establish a diagnosis of dementia, it is necessary, in addition to cognitive impairment, to prove the existence of a disorder of instrumental activities of daily living (IADL). The Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire is a reliable instrument translated into different languages. This study aims to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the Serbian version of the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire. The study  included 75 patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. The questionnaire was scored using the weighted average (WA) and item response theory (IRT) scoring method. Diagnostic accuracy was examined using receiver–operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The area under the curves (AUC) was calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The correlation between IRT and WA scores was strong and significant (r=-0.980, p<0.001). The AUC for the IRT scores of A-IADL-Q  was 0.832 (95% CI: 0.729 to 0.909), while the AUC for the WA scores of A-IADL-Q was 0.848 (95% CI: 0.746 to 0.920). Both were significantly different from the AUC of 0.5 (p<0.001). There  was no significant difference between the AUCs of IRT and WA scoring  (z=1.157; p=0.247). Cutoffs and the highest combination of sensitivity and specificity for the IRT (sensitivity 0.767; specificity 0. 844) and WA (sensitivity 0.744; specificity 0. 844) scores of A-IADL-Q  were calculated. We have shown that A-IADL-Q has moderate diagnostic accuracy in differentiating dementia and MCI. This instrument can be used in combination with cognitive measures to diagnose dementia in its early stages.","PeriodicalId":167216,"journal":{"name":"Facta Universitatis, Series: Medicine and Biology","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTRUMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING IN MILD COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT AND DEMENTIA DUE TO ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE: DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY OF THE SERBIAN VERSION OF THE AMSTERDAM IADL QUESTIONNAIRE\",\"authors\":\"V. Milošević, M. Malobabic, Eva Antić, Aleksandra Aracki Trenkić, D. Stojanov, J. Bašić\",\"doi\":\"10.22190/fumb221215009m\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"To establish a diagnosis of dementia, it is necessary, in addition to cognitive impairment, to prove the existence of a disorder of instrumental activities of daily living (IADL). The Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire is a reliable instrument translated into different languages. This study aims to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the Serbian version of the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire. The study  included 75 patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. The questionnaire was scored using the weighted average (WA) and item response theory (IRT) scoring method. Diagnostic accuracy was examined using receiver–operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The area under the curves (AUC) was calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The correlation between IRT and WA scores was strong and significant (r=-0.980, p<0.001). The AUC for the IRT scores of A-IADL-Q  was 0.832 (95% CI: 0.729 to 0.909), while the AUC for the WA scores of A-IADL-Q was 0.848 (95% CI: 0.746 to 0.920). Both were significantly different from the AUC of 0.5 (p<0.001). There  was no significant difference between the AUCs of IRT and WA scoring  (z=1.157; p=0.247). Cutoffs and the highest combination of sensitivity and specificity for the IRT (sensitivity 0.767; specificity 0. 844) and WA (sensitivity 0.744; specificity 0. 844) scores of A-IADL-Q  were calculated. We have shown that A-IADL-Q has moderate diagnostic accuracy in differentiating dementia and MCI. This instrument can be used in combination with cognitive measures to diagnose dementia in its early stages.\",\"PeriodicalId\":167216,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Facta Universitatis, Series: Medicine and Biology\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Facta Universitatis, Series: Medicine and Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22190/fumb221215009m\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facta Universitatis, Series: Medicine and Biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22190/fumb221215009m","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了确定痴呆症的诊断,除了认知障碍外,还需要证明日常生活工具活动障碍(IADL)的存在。阿姆斯特丹国际数据研究所问卷是一份翻译成不同语言的可靠工具。本研究旨在评估塞尔维亚语版阿姆斯特丹IADL问卷的诊断准确性。该研究包括75名因阿尔茨海默病而患有轻度认知障碍(MCI)和痴呆的患者。采用加权平均(WA)和项目反应理论(IRT)评分法对问卷进行评分。采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线检查诊断准确性。曲线下面积(AUC)以95%置信区间(CI)计算。IRT与WA评分相关性强且显著(r=-0.980, p<0.001)。A-IADL-Q的IRT评分AUC为0.832 (95% CI: 0.729 ~ 0.909), WA评分AUC为0.848 (95% CI: 0.746 ~ 0.920)。两者的AUC均为0.5,差异有统计学意义(p<0.001)。IRT的auc与WA评分无显著差异(z=1.157;p = 0.247)。IRT的截止点和最高的敏感性和特异性组合(敏感性0.767;特异性0。844)和WA(敏感性0.744;特异性0。844)计算A-IADL-Q评分。我们已经表明,A-IADL-Q在区分痴呆和轻度认知障碍方面具有中等的诊断准确性。该仪器可以与认知测量相结合,在早期阶段诊断痴呆症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTRUMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING IN MILD COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT AND DEMENTIA DUE TO ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE: DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY OF THE SERBIAN VERSION OF THE AMSTERDAM IADL QUESTIONNAIRE
To establish a diagnosis of dementia, it is necessary, in addition to cognitive impairment, to prove the existence of a disorder of instrumental activities of daily living (IADL). The Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire is a reliable instrument translated into different languages. This study aims to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the Serbian version of the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire. The study  included 75 patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. The questionnaire was scored using the weighted average (WA) and item response theory (IRT) scoring method. Diagnostic accuracy was examined using receiver–operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The area under the curves (AUC) was calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The correlation between IRT and WA scores was strong and significant (r=-0.980, p<0.001). The AUC for the IRT scores of A-IADL-Q  was 0.832 (95% CI: 0.729 to 0.909), while the AUC for the WA scores of A-IADL-Q was 0.848 (95% CI: 0.746 to 0.920). Both were significantly different from the AUC of 0.5 (p<0.001). There  was no significant difference between the AUCs of IRT and WA scoring  (z=1.157; p=0.247). Cutoffs and the highest combination of sensitivity and specificity for the IRT (sensitivity 0.767; specificity 0. 844) and WA (sensitivity 0.744; specificity 0. 844) scores of A-IADL-Q  were calculated. We have shown that A-IADL-Q has moderate diagnostic accuracy in differentiating dementia and MCI. This instrument can be used in combination with cognitive measures to diagnose dementia in its early stages.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信