用于检测医院成人酒精使用问题的筛查工具及其诊断测试的准确性:一项系统综述。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Jacqueline M Bisschop, Hendrik J M de Jonge, Anja H Brunsveld-Reinders, Dike H van de Mheen, Jolanda J P Mathijssen, Andrea D Rozema
{"title":"用于检测医院成人酒精使用问题的筛查工具及其诊断测试的准确性:一项系统综述。","authors":"Jacqueline M Bisschop, Hendrik J M de Jonge, Anja H Brunsveld-Reinders, Dike H van de Mheen, Jolanda J P Mathijssen, Andrea D Rozema","doi":"10.1111/dar.13987","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Issues: </strong>Alcohol consumption can cause physical, psychological and social problems that can result in hospitalisations. Screening in hospitals helps to determine which patients should be given interventions. In this review, we aimed to summarise the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of screening instruments for problematic alcohol use among adults in hospitals.</p><p><strong>Approach: </strong>We searched three databases for studies that assessed validated screening instruments for problematic alcohol use among hospitalised adults. We used the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool to evaluate the risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Key findings: </strong>We included 20 studies in the review. In 11 studies performed in the emergency departments, 5 instruments had a high DTA: the AUDIT, the AUDIT-C, the RAPS4-QF, the 2-question screener and HOLD 5. In the eight studies with inpatients, three instruments had a high DTA: the AUDIT, CAGE-C and CAGE +10 items. Finally, only one of the included studies evaluated outpatients; the authors reported a high DTA for the AUDIT-C.</p><p><strong>Implication and conclusions: </strong>The results indicate that the AUDIT is an appropriate screening instrument for both inpatients and patients in the emergency department. Moreover, for patients in the emergency department, the AUDIT-C and the RAPS4-QF can be used. More research is needed on outpatients, and several screening instruments have only been validated with one study (i.e., the 2-question screener, DSM-IV-2, HOLD 5, CAGE-C and CAGE +10 questions).</p>","PeriodicalId":11318,"journal":{"name":"Drug and alcohol review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Screening instruments to detect problematic alcohol use among adults in hospitals and their diagnostic test accuracy: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Jacqueline M Bisschop, Hendrik J M de Jonge, Anja H Brunsveld-Reinders, Dike H van de Mheen, Jolanda J P Mathijssen, Andrea D Rozema\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dar.13987\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Issues: </strong>Alcohol consumption can cause physical, psychological and social problems that can result in hospitalisations. Screening in hospitals helps to determine which patients should be given interventions. In this review, we aimed to summarise the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of screening instruments for problematic alcohol use among adults in hospitals.</p><p><strong>Approach: </strong>We searched three databases for studies that assessed validated screening instruments for problematic alcohol use among hospitalised adults. We used the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool to evaluate the risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Key findings: </strong>We included 20 studies in the review. In 11 studies performed in the emergency departments, 5 instruments had a high DTA: the AUDIT, the AUDIT-C, the RAPS4-QF, the 2-question screener and HOLD 5. In the eight studies with inpatients, three instruments had a high DTA: the AUDIT, CAGE-C and CAGE +10 items. Finally, only one of the included studies evaluated outpatients; the authors reported a high DTA for the AUDIT-C.</p><p><strong>Implication and conclusions: </strong>The results indicate that the AUDIT is an appropriate screening instrument for both inpatients and patients in the emergency department. Moreover, for patients in the emergency department, the AUDIT-C and the RAPS4-QF can be used. More research is needed on outpatients, and several screening instruments have only been validated with one study (i.e., the 2-question screener, DSM-IV-2, HOLD 5, CAGE-C and CAGE +10 questions).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11318,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drug and alcohol review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drug and alcohol review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.13987\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug and alcohol review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.13987","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

问题:饮酒会导致身体、心理和社会问题,并可能导致住院治疗。医院的筛查有助于确定哪些患者应该接受干预。在这篇综述中,我们的目的是总结诊断测试的准确性(DTA)筛选仪器在医院成人问题酒精使用。方法:我们检索了三个数据库,以评估住院成人中问题酒精使用的有效筛查工具。我们使用诊断准确性研究质量评估2工具来评估偏倚风险。主要发现:我们纳入了20项研究。在急诊科进行的11项研究中,有5种仪器的DTA较高:AUDIT、AUDIT- c、RAPS4-QF、2题筛选器和HOLD 5。在8项住院患者的研究中,AUDIT、CAGE- c和CAGE +10三项仪器的DTA较高。最后,纳入的研究中只有一项评估了门诊患者;作者报告了AUDIT-C的高DTA。意义与结论:结果表明,审计是一种合适的筛查工具,无论是住院病人还是急诊科病人。此外,对于急诊科的患者,可以使用AUDIT-C和RAPS4-QF。需要对门诊患者进行更多的研究,并且几种筛选工具仅在一项研究中得到验证(即2题筛选器,DSM-IV-2, HOLD 5, CAGE- c和CAGE +10题)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Screening instruments to detect problematic alcohol use among adults in hospitals and their diagnostic test accuracy: A systematic review.

Issues: Alcohol consumption can cause physical, psychological and social problems that can result in hospitalisations. Screening in hospitals helps to determine which patients should be given interventions. In this review, we aimed to summarise the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of screening instruments for problematic alcohol use among adults in hospitals.

Approach: We searched three databases for studies that assessed validated screening instruments for problematic alcohol use among hospitalised adults. We used the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool to evaluate the risk of bias.

Key findings: We included 20 studies in the review. In 11 studies performed in the emergency departments, 5 instruments had a high DTA: the AUDIT, the AUDIT-C, the RAPS4-QF, the 2-question screener and HOLD 5. In the eight studies with inpatients, three instruments had a high DTA: the AUDIT, CAGE-C and CAGE +10 items. Finally, only one of the included studies evaluated outpatients; the authors reported a high DTA for the AUDIT-C.

Implication and conclusions: The results indicate that the AUDIT is an appropriate screening instrument for both inpatients and patients in the emergency department. Moreover, for patients in the emergency department, the AUDIT-C and the RAPS4-QF can be used. More research is needed on outpatients, and several screening instruments have only been validated with one study (i.e., the 2-question screener, DSM-IV-2, HOLD 5, CAGE-C and CAGE +10 questions).

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
Drug and alcohol review
Drug and alcohol review SUBSTANCE ABUSE-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
10.50%
发文量
151
期刊介绍: Drug and Alcohol Review is an international meeting ground for the views, expertise and experience of all those involved in studying alcohol, tobacco and drug problems. Contributors to the Journal examine and report on alcohol and drug use from a wide range of clinical, biomedical, epidemiological, psychological and sociological perspectives. Drug and Alcohol Review particularly encourages the submission of papers which have a harm reduction perspective. However, all philosophies will find a place in the Journal: the principal criterion for publication of papers is their quality.
×
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