International journal of geriatric psychiatry · 2004
Validity of the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS) in post-stroke subjects.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАВалидационное 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.
Barber Mark, Stott David J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment and dementia are very common after stroke. Telephone screening has potential advantages for clinical follow-up and population-based research in this group. We wished to test the validity of the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS) for cognitive testing in post-stroke subjects.
METHODS: Cognitive function in stroke outpatients was assessed using the R-CAMCOG (a modification of the cognitive part of the Cambridge Examination for Mental Disorders of the Elderly, for use in stroke subjects) along with the TICS and a modified version, the TICSm. The tests were administered in random order. A cut-off point of 33 on the R-CAMCOG was used to define post-stroke dementia.
RESULTS: Sixty-four patients with a median age of 72 years were assessed. The Pearson correlation coefficients between the R-CAMCOG and the TICS and TICSm were 0.833 and 0.855 (both p <0.001) respectively. Twenty-four (38%) patients met R-CAMCOG criteria for post-stroke dementia. The area under the ROC curve for both the TICS and TICSm was 0.94. Using a cut-off of 28 or less on the TICS produced a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 85% for the diagnosis of post-stroke dementia. For the TICSm a cut-off of 20 or lower produced a sensitivity of 92% and a specificity of 80%.
CONCLUSIONS: The TICS and TICSm telephone questionnaires are practicable and valid methods of assessing cognitive function in community outpatients following stroke. Scores of < or =28 and < or =20 respectively carry good sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of post-stroke dementia.
METHODS: Cognitive function in stroke outpatients was assessed using the R-CAMCOG (a modification of the cognitive part of the Cambridge Examination for Mental Disorders of the Elderly, for use in stroke subjects) along with the TICS and a modified version, the TICSm. The tests were administered in random order. A cut-off point of 33 on the R-CAMCOG was used to define post-stroke dementia.
RESULTS: Sixty-four patients with a median age of 72 years were assessed. The Pearson correlation coefficients between the R-CAMCOG and the TICS and TICSm were 0.833 and 0.855 (both p <0.001) respectively. Twenty-four (38%) patients met R-CAMCOG criteria for post-stroke dementia. The area under the ROC curve for both the TICS and TICSm was 0.94. Using a cut-off of 28 or less on the TICS produced a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 85% for the diagnosis of post-stroke dementia. For the TICSm a cut-off of 20 or lower produced a sensitivity of 92% and a specificity of 80%.
CONCLUSIONS: The TICS and TICSm telephone questionnaires are practicable and valid methods of assessing cognitive function in community outpatients following stroke. Scores of < or =28 and < or =20 respectively carry good sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of post-stroke dementia.