以质量求发展,以服务铸品牌

护理学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (8): 12-16.doi: 10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2023.08.012

• 研究生园地 • 上一篇    下一篇

主观认知下降问卷21在养老机构老年人认知评估中的优势分析

李慧源, 郭雪琪, 唐启群, 胡惠菊, 杨娇, 陈瑶   

  1. 华北理工大学 护理与康复学院,河北 唐山 063210
  • 收稿日期:2022-12-03 发布日期:2023-05-12
  • 通讯作者: 唐启群(1968-),男,湖南武冈人,博士,教授,硕士生导师。E-mail:jwctang2008@163.com
  • 作者简介:李慧源(1998-),女,河北邢台人,本科学历,硕士研究生在读,护师。
  • 基金资助:
    2022年度河北省高等学校人文社会科学研究重点项目(SD2022098)

Role of Subjective Cognitive Decline Questionnaire 21 in cognitive assessment of elderly people in nursing homes

LI Hui-yuan, GUO Xue-qi, TANG Qi-qun, HU Hui-ju, YANG Jiao, CHEN Yao   

  1. School of Nursing and Rehabilitation, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan 063210, China
  • Received:2022-12-03 Published:2023-05-12

摘要: 目的 比较主观认知下降问卷21与主观认知减退问卷在养老机构老年人认知评估中的应用价值,为有效识别认知下降老年人提供理论指导。方法 采用便利抽样法,选取河北省6所养老机构内416名老年人为研究对象,采用一般资料调查表、主观认知下降问卷21、主观认知减退问卷、蒙特利尔认知评估量表收集资料,分析量表的接受者操作特性(ROC)曲线、最佳临界值、交叉检验准确率和阳性似然比。结果 以蒙特利尔认知评估量表为参照,主观认知下降问卷21和主观认知减退问卷的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.897和0.809,且两者ROC曲线下面积之差为0.088(Z=4.343,P<0.001),主观认知下降问卷21和主观认知减退问卷的最佳临界值分别为9.250和8.500,敏感度、特异度、交叉检验准确度和阳性似然比分别为0.822、0.881、0.815、6.930和0.798、0.810、0.750、4.200。结论 与主观认知减退问卷中的自我主观认知评估问卷相比,主观认知下降问卷21更适用于评估养老机构老年人的认知功能。

关键词: 认知功能, 主观认知下降, 主观认知减退, 养老机构

Abstract: Objective To compare the application value of Subjective Cognitive Decline Questionnaire 21 (SCD-Q21) and Subjective Cognitive Decline Questionnaire (SCD-Q) in cognitive assessment of elderly people in nursing homes, and to provide theoretical guidance for effective identification of elderly people with cognitive decline. Methods A total of 416 elderly people in 6 nursing homes in Hebei Province were selected by convenience sampling. General Information Questionnaire, SCD-Q21, and SCD-Q, and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were used for the investigation. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, optimal threshold, cross check accuracy and positive likelihood ratio of the scales were analyzed. Results Taking MoCA as reference, the area under ROC curve of SCD-Q21 and SCD-Q was 0.897 and 0.809, respectively, and the difference between the areas under ROC curve was 0.088 (Z=4.343, P<0.001). The optimal cutoff value for SCD-Q21 and SCD-Q was 9.250 and 8.500, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, cross-test accuracy and positive likelihood ratio was 0.822, 0.881, 0.815, 6.930 and 0.798, 0.810, 0.750, 4.200, respectively. Conclusion Compared with the Self-subjective Cognitive Assessment Questionnaire in SCD-Q, SCD-Q 21 is more suitable for evaluating the cognitive function of elderly people in nursing homes.

Key words: cognitive function, subjective cognitive decline, subjective cognitive decline, nursing home

中图分类号: 

  • R47
[1] 胡晴, 宋银华, 王诗镔, 等. 养老机构老年人主观认知下降现况及影响因素研究[J]. 护理学杂志, 2022, 37(9):87-90. DOI:10.3870/j.issn.1001-4152.2022.09.087.
[2] 郝立晓, 邢悦, 贾建国,等. 英文版主观认知下降问卷21的汉化研究[J].中国全科医学,2021, 24(18):2349-2354. DOI:10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2021.00.403.
[3] Hao L, Jia J, Xing Y, et al.The reliability and validity test of subjective cognitive decline questionnaire 21 with population in a Chinese community[J]. Brain Behav, 2022, 12(8): e2709. DOI:10.1002/brb3.2709.
[4] Ryu SY, Kim A, Kim S, et al.Self- and informant-reported cognitive functioning and awareness in subjective cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment, and very mild Alzheimer disease[J]. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2020, 35(1):91-98. DOI:10.1002/gps.5224.
[5] Bubbico G, Di Iorio A, Lauriola M, et al.Subjective cognitive decline and nighttime sleep alterations, a longitudinal analysis[J]. Front Aging Neurosci, 2019, 11:142. DOI:10.3389/fnagi.2019.00142.
[6] Wong R, Al-Omary M, Baker D, et al.Cognitive dysfunction is associated with abnormal responses in cerebral blood flow in patients with single ventricular physiology: novel insights from transcranial doppler ultrasound[J].Congenit Heart Dis, 2019, 14(4):638-644. DOI:10.1111/chd.12763.
[7] Lane CA, Parker TD, Cash DM, et al.Study protocol: insight 46-a neuroscience sub-study of the MRC National Survey of Health and Development[J]. BMC Neurol, 2017, 17(1):75. DOI:10.2991/artres.k.200417.001.
[8] Cardoso J, Apagueno B, Lysne P, et al.Pain and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) in aging[J]. Pain Med, 2021, 22(8):1776-1783. DOI:10.1093/pm/pnab003.
[9] Gifford KA, Liu D, Romano R, et al.Development of a Subjective Cognitive Decline Questionnaire using item response theory: a pilot study[J]. Alzheimers Dement (Amst), 2015, 1(4):429-439. DOI:10.1016/j.dadm.2015.09.004.
[10] Rami L, Mollica MA, García-Sanchez C, et al.The Subjective Cognitive Decline Questionnaire (SCD-Q): a validation study[J]. J Alzheimers Dis, 2014, 41(2):453-466. DOI:10.3233/JAD-132027.
[11] Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V, et al.The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MOCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment[J]. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2005, 53(4):695-699. DOI:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.
[12] Pinto TCC, Machado L, Bulgacov TM, et al.Is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) screening superior to the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in the detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's Disease (AD) in the elderly?[J]. Int Psychogeriatr, 2019, 31(4):491-504. DOI:10.1017/S1041610218001370.
[13] 胡惠菊, 韩静, 唐启群, 等. Morse跌倒评估量表与STEADI跌倒风险自评量表在养老机构老年人中的应用比较[J]. 护理学报,2021,28(19):8-12.DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2021.19.008.
[14] 李运, 赵佳, 唐启群, 等. 居住养老机构的老年人失能现状及失能老年人的生活质量影响因素[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2019, 39(5):1213-1216.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-9202.2019.05.060.
[15] Valech N, Mollica MA, Olives J, et al. Informants' perception of subjective cognitive decline helps to discriminate preclinical Alzheimer's disease from normal aging[J]. J Alzheimers Dis, 2015,48 Suppl 1:S87-98.DOI:10.3233/JAD-150117.
[16] 朱莲莲,许虹波,董爱淑,等. Edmonton衰弱量表和Groningen衰弱指标在养老机构老年人衰弱评估中应用的比较[J]. 中国护理管理,2022,22(1):83-87.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-1756.2022.01.018.
[1] 朱明月, 丁晓彤, 史纪元, 李峥. 自我感知老化对老年人认知功能影响的系统评价[J]. 护理学报, 2023, 30(8): 52-57.
[2] 刘畅, 常婧, 焦雨晨, 许丽娟, 嵇艳. 轻度认知障碍患者运动干预的最佳证据总结[J]. 护理学报, 2023, 30(5): 53-58.
[3] 李亚杰, 李博, 王梅杰, 肖舒丹, 成巧梅. 养老机构失智护理单元疗愈环境评价指标体系的构建[J]. 护理学报, 2023, 30(2): 73-78.
[4] 赵凌波, 曹文丽. 养老机构失智症照护人员职业能力评价体系构建[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(7): 27-31.
[5] 张营, 孟英涛, 尚美美, 杨德艳, 朱玉方, 王倩. 癌症相关认知功能障碍评估和管理的证据总结[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(3): 52-56.
[6] 胡惠菊, 郭雪琪, 唐启群, 成杰, 李慧源, 李田田. 衰老认知在养老机构老年人领悟社会支持与内在力量间的中介效应[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(3): 57-61.
[7] 郭雪琪, 谷奕樊, 杨娇, 胡惠菊, 李慧源, 武建辉, 唐启群. 养老机构睡眠障碍老人跌倒风险的危险因素研究[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(22): 11-14.
[8] 杨娇娇, 彭丽丽, 王三香, 李翊澜, 石奥利, 田甜, 杨金花. 模拟社会生活照护对养老机构老年痴呆患者激越行为的影响[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(17): 75-78.
[9] 欧阳蝶, 杨洁, 于相宇, 袁晓玲. 内分泌治疗对乳腺癌患者主客观认知功能影响的系统评价[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(16): 37-42.
[10] 郭雪琪, 李慧源, 唐启群, 陈瑶, 王骞. 427名养老机构高龄老人老化期望现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(14): 53-57.
[11] 陆静钰, 杨连招, 陈玲, 杨永. 社区老年高血压患者轻度认知功能障碍风险预测模型的构建与验证[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(24): 42-50.
[12] 胡惠菊, 韩静, 唐启群, 成杰, 李慧源. Morse跌倒评估量表与STEADI跌倒风险自评量表在养老机构老年人中的应用比较[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(19): 8-12.
[13] 韩静, 胡惠菊, 唐启群, 成杰, 郭雪琪. 领悟社会支持在养老机构老年人孤独感与成功老龄化的中介效应[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(17): 53-58.
[14] 李玮彤, 宋玉磊, 陈宇婧, 徐桂华. 养老机构老年人综合能力评估等级划分方式的研究[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(15): 5-9.
[15] 蔡敏, 卢咏梅, 魏琳, 周海燕, 蔡美英, 彭政, 黄丽琼, 周莉, 王建明. 广州养老机构老年人开展园艺疗法娱乐方式的意愿析因[J]. 护理学报, 2020, 27(3): 1-4.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
[1] 王丽萍. 读《Critical Thinking Ⅰ:Seeking Conceptual Clarity》有感[J]. 护理学报, 2014, 21(23): 69 -70 .
[2] 罗祥蓉,谢翠华,蒋娅,李际敏,李景香,黄莺,曹瑛,高方,李文霞. 顽固性糖尿病压力性足溃疡患者的个性化减压护理效果观察[J]. 护理学报, 2016, 23(7): 57 -59 .
[3] 刘华龙,张培璐,葛学娣. 住院高龄患者主要照顾者对误吸预防的知信行调查分析[J]. 护理学报, 2016, 23(21): 14 -18 .
[4] 马瑞英,李亚洁. 美国疾病诊断相关组法护理支付方式对我国护理收费的启示[J]. 护理学报, 2012, 19(1): 23 -25 .
[5] 涂丽娟,张平,孔令磷. 233名护生社区护理就业意向及驱动因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2012, 19(12): 52 -56 .
[6] 刘莉,张秀军,汪洪杰. 安徽省高职高专院校护理专职教师临床实践现状调查分析[J]. 护理学报, 2012, 19(13): 1 -4 .
[7] 郑灵,田荣,郭莉芳,文焕琛,张研. 耳穴贴压配合手法按摩预防硅胶囊假体隆乳术后包膜挛缩的效果观察[J]. 护理学报, 2012, 19(5): 72 -73 .
[8] 王玉. 维持性血液透析患者治疗依从性影响因素病例对照研究[J]. 护理学报, 2013, 20(11): 34 -36 .
[9] 顾芬,黎金玲,孙春燕,严蕾,侯黎莉. 肺高血压住院患者睡眠质量现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2016, 23(13): 35 -37,38 .
[10] 沈霖,唐金凤,王惠. 人形图在普外科护理查房中的应用[J]. 护理学报, 2016, 23(21): 19 -21 .