Heart & lung : the journal of critical care · 2015
Performance of the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics (ANAM) in detecting cognitive impairment in heart failure patients.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Xie Susan S, Goldstein Carly M, Gathright Emily C, Gunstad John, Dolansky Mary A, Redle Joseph, Hughes Joel W
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate capacity of the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics (ANAM) to detect cognitive impairment (CI) in heart failure (HF) patients.
BACKGROUND: CI is a key prognostic marker in HF. Though the most widely used cognitive screen in HF, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is insufficiently sensitive. The ANAM has demonstrated sensitivity to cognitive domains affected by HF, but has not been assessed in this population.
METHODS: Investigators administered the ANAM and MMSE to 57 HF patients, compared against a composite model of cognitive function.
RESULTS: ANAM efficiency (p < .05) and accuracy scores (p < .001) successfully differentiated CI and non-CI. ANAM efficiency and accuracy scores classified 97.7% and 93.0% of non-CI patients, and 14.3% and 21.4% with CI, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The ANAM is more effective than the MMSE for detecting CI, but further research is needed to develop a more optimal cognitive screen for routine use in HF patients.
BACKGROUND: CI is a key prognostic marker in HF. Though the most widely used cognitive screen in HF, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is insufficiently sensitive. The ANAM has demonstrated sensitivity to cognitive domains affected by HF, but has not been assessed in this population.
METHODS: Investigators administered the ANAM and MMSE to 57 HF patients, compared against a composite model of cognitive function.
RESULTS: ANAM efficiency (p < .05) and accuracy scores (p < .001) successfully differentiated CI and non-CI. ANAM efficiency and accuracy scores classified 97.7% and 93.0% of non-CI patients, and 14.3% and 21.4% with CI, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The ANAM is more effective than the MMSE for detecting CI, but further research is needed to develop a more optimal cognitive screen for routine use in HF patients.