Age and ageing · 2009
A comparison of four tests of cognition as predictors of inability to perform spirometry in old age.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Allen Stephen C, Baxter Mark
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: previous studies have shown that a Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) score of <24/30 and inability to copy intersecting pentagons (IP) predicts inability to perform spirometry. We hypothesised that clock drawing tests (CLOX 1 and 2), being validated tests of cognitive executive function, might predict spirometry performance with a higher sensitivity and specificity than the MMSE or IP.
METHODS: we studied 113 (84 females) spirometry-naïve inpatients, mean age of 84 years (range 74-97). All performed the MMSE, IP, CLOX 1 and 2 and then attempted to perform assisted spirometry to the American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society standard.
RESULTS: of 113, 49 met the criteria for adequate spirometry. Using normative thresholds for probable impairment, inability to perform spirometry was predicted by MMSE <24/30 with a sensitivity of 81% and specificity of 90% (P<0.0000); by inability to copy IP with a sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 100% (P<0.0000); by CLOX1 <10/15 with a sensitivity of 81% and specificity of 49% (P<0.001); and by CLOX2 <12/15 with a sensitivity of 63% and specificity of 65% (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: CLOX tests did not perform better than MMSE and IP to identify subjects unlikely to be able to perform spirometry. Achieving assisted spirometry from the naïve state in old age might be more determined by global cognitive function and ideo-motor praxis than by executive control function.
METHODS: we studied 113 (84 females) spirometry-naïve inpatients, mean age of 84 years (range 74-97). All performed the MMSE, IP, CLOX 1 and 2 and then attempted to perform assisted spirometry to the American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society standard.
RESULTS: of 113, 49 met the criteria for adequate spirometry. Using normative thresholds for probable impairment, inability to perform spirometry was predicted by MMSE <24/30 with a sensitivity of 81% and specificity of 90% (P<0.0000); by inability to copy IP with a sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 100% (P<0.0000); by CLOX1 <10/15 with a sensitivity of 81% and specificity of 49% (P<0.001); and by CLOX2 <12/15 with a sensitivity of 63% and specificity of 65% (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: CLOX tests did not perform better than MMSE and IP to identify subjects unlikely to be able to perform spirometry. Achieving assisted spirometry from the naïve state in old age might be more determined by global cognitive function and ideo-motor praxis than by executive control function.