Cargando…

Evaluation of brief screening tools for neurocognitive impairment in HIV/AIDS: a systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE(S): To systematically review literature on brief screening tools used to detect and differentiate between normal cognition and neurocognitive impairment and HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HANDs) in adult populations of persons with HIV. DESIGN: A formal systematic review. METHODS...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zipursky, Amy R., Gogolishvili, David, Rueda, Sergio, Brunetta, Jason, Carvalhal, Adriana, McCombe, Jennifer A., Gill, M. John, Rachlis, Anita, Rosenes, Ron, Arbess, Gordon, Marcotte, Thomas, Rourke, Sean B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3814629/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23751261
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0b013e328363bf56
_version_ 1782289283880583168
author Zipursky, Amy R.
Gogolishvili, David
Rueda, Sergio
Brunetta, Jason
Carvalhal, Adriana
McCombe, Jennifer A.
Gill, M. John
Rachlis, Anita
Rosenes, Ron
Arbess, Gordon
Marcotte, Thomas
Rourke, Sean B.
author_facet Zipursky, Amy R.
Gogolishvili, David
Rueda, Sergio
Brunetta, Jason
Carvalhal, Adriana
McCombe, Jennifer A.
Gill, M. John
Rachlis, Anita
Rosenes, Ron
Arbess, Gordon
Marcotte, Thomas
Rourke, Sean B.
author_sort Zipursky, Amy R.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE(S): To systematically review literature on brief screening tools used to detect and differentiate between normal cognition and neurocognitive impairment and HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HANDs) in adult populations of persons with HIV. DESIGN: A formal systematic review. METHODS: We searched six electronic databases in 2011 and contacted experts to identify relevant studies published through May 2012. We selected empirical studies that focused on evaluating brief screening tools (<20 min) for neurocognitive impairment in persons with HIV. Two reviewers independently reviewed retrieved literature for potential relevance and methodological quality. Meta-analyses were completed on screening tools that had sufficient data. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies met inclusion criteria; we focused on 31 studies that compared brief screening tools with reference tests. Within these 31 studies, 39 tools were evaluated and 67% used a comprehensive neuropsychological battery as a reference. The majority of these studies evaluated HIV-associated dementia (HAD). Meta-analyses demonstrated that the HIV Dementia Scale (HDS) has poor pooled sensitivity (0.48) and the International HIV Dementia Scale (IHDS) has moderate pooled sensitivity (0.62) in detecting a range of cognitive impairment. Five newer screening tools had relatively good sensitivities (>0.70); however, none of the tools differentiated HAND conditions well enough to suggest broader use. There were significant methodological shortcomings noted in most studies. CONCLUSION: HDS and IHDS perform well to screen for HAD but poorly for milder HAND conditions. Further investigation, with improved methodology, is required to understand the utility of newer screening tools for HAND; further tools may need to be developed for milder HAND conditions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3814629
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38146292013-11-04 Evaluation of brief screening tools for neurocognitive impairment in HIV/AIDS: a systematic review of the literature Zipursky, Amy R. Gogolishvili, David Rueda, Sergio Brunetta, Jason Carvalhal, Adriana McCombe, Jennifer A. Gill, M. John Rachlis, Anita Rosenes, Ron Arbess, Gordon Marcotte, Thomas Rourke, Sean B. AIDS Clinical Science OBJECTIVE(S): To systematically review literature on brief screening tools used to detect and differentiate between normal cognition and neurocognitive impairment and HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HANDs) in adult populations of persons with HIV. DESIGN: A formal systematic review. METHODS: We searched six electronic databases in 2011 and contacted experts to identify relevant studies published through May 2012. We selected empirical studies that focused on evaluating brief screening tools (<20 min) for neurocognitive impairment in persons with HIV. Two reviewers independently reviewed retrieved literature for potential relevance and methodological quality. Meta-analyses were completed on screening tools that had sufficient data. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies met inclusion criteria; we focused on 31 studies that compared brief screening tools with reference tests. Within these 31 studies, 39 tools were evaluated and 67% used a comprehensive neuropsychological battery as a reference. The majority of these studies evaluated HIV-associated dementia (HAD). Meta-analyses demonstrated that the HIV Dementia Scale (HDS) has poor pooled sensitivity (0.48) and the International HIV Dementia Scale (IHDS) has moderate pooled sensitivity (0.62) in detecting a range of cognitive impairment. Five newer screening tools had relatively good sensitivities (>0.70); however, none of the tools differentiated HAND conditions well enough to suggest broader use. There were significant methodological shortcomings noted in most studies. CONCLUSION: HDS and IHDS perform well to screen for HAD but poorly for milder HAND conditions. Further investigation, with improved methodology, is required to understand the utility of newer screening tools for HAND; further tools may need to be developed for milder HAND conditions. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2013-09-24 2013-09-18 /pmc/articles/PMC3814629/ /pubmed/23751261 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0b013e328363bf56 Text en © 2013 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivitives 3.0 License, where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.
spellingShingle Clinical Science
Zipursky, Amy R.
Gogolishvili, David
Rueda, Sergio
Brunetta, Jason
Carvalhal, Adriana
McCombe, Jennifer A.
Gill, M. John
Rachlis, Anita
Rosenes, Ron
Arbess, Gordon
Marcotte, Thomas
Rourke, Sean B.
Evaluation of brief screening tools for neurocognitive impairment in HIV/AIDS: a systematic review of the literature
title Evaluation of brief screening tools for neurocognitive impairment in HIV/AIDS: a systematic review of the literature
title_full Evaluation of brief screening tools for neurocognitive impairment in HIV/AIDS: a systematic review of the literature
title_fullStr Evaluation of brief screening tools for neurocognitive impairment in HIV/AIDS: a systematic review of the literature
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of brief screening tools for neurocognitive impairment in HIV/AIDS: a systematic review of the literature
title_short Evaluation of brief screening tools for neurocognitive impairment in HIV/AIDS: a systematic review of the literature
title_sort evaluation of brief screening tools for neurocognitive impairment in hiv/aids: a systematic review of the literature
topic Clinical Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3814629/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23751261
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0b013e328363bf56
work_keys_str_mv AT zipurskyamyr evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature
AT gogolishvilidavid evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature
AT ruedasergio evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature
AT brunettajason evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature
AT carvalhaladriana evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature
AT mccombejennifera evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature
AT gillmjohn evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature
AT rachlisanita evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature
AT rosenesron evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature
AT arbessgordon evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature
AT marcottethomas evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature
AT rourkeseanb evaluationofbriefscreeningtoolsforneurocognitiveimpairmentinhivaidsasystematicreviewoftheliterature