Rapid diagnostic test for antenatal syphilis screening in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectivesTo undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the test performance including sensitivity and specificity of rapid immunochromatographic syphilis (ICS) point-of-care (POC) tests at antenatal clinics compared with reference standard tests (non-treponemal (TP) and TP tests) for active syphilis in pregnant women.MethodsFive electronic databases were searched (PubMed, EMBASE, CRD, Cochrane Library and LILACS) to March 2016 for diagnostic accuracy studies of ICS test and standard reference tests for syphilis in pregnant women. Methodological quality was assessed using QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies). A bivariate meta-analysis was undertaken to generate pooled estimates of diagnostic parameters. Results were presented using a coupled forest plot of sensitivity and specificity and a scatter plot.ResultsThe methodological quality of the five included studies with regards to risk of bias and applicability concern judgements was either low or unclear. One study was judged as high risk of bias for patient selection due to exclusion of pregnant women with a previous history of syphilis, and one study was judged at high risk of bias for study flow and timing as not all patients were included in the analysis. Five studies contributed to the meta-analysis, providing a pooled sensitivity and specificity for ICS of 0.85 (95% CrI: 0.73 to 0.92) and 0.98 (95% CrI: 0.95 to 0.99), respectively.ConclusionsThis review and meta-analysis observed that rapid ICS POC tests have a high sensitivity and specificity when performed in pregnant women at antenatal clinics. However, the methodological quality of the existing evidence base should be taken into consideration when interpreting these results.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016036335.

Download Full-text

Accuracy of Anti-GBM Antibodies in Diagnosing Anti-Glomerular Basement Membrane Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

American Journal of Nephrology ◽

10.1159/000518362 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-8

Author(s):

Akihiro Shiroshita ◽

Yasuhiro Oda ◽

Seiji Takenouchi ◽

Noboru Hagino ◽

Yuki Kataoka

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

High Risk ◽

Basement Membrane ◽

Diagnostic Accuracy ◽

Cohort Studies ◽

Quality Assessment ◽

Sensitivity And Specificity ◽

Glomerular Basement Membrane ◽

Case Control ◽

Risk Of Bias

Background: The sensitivity and specificity of anti-glomerular basement membrane (GBM) antibodies have not been systematically analyzed. In this systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of anti-GBM antibodies for anti-GBM disease. Summary: Potential studies were searched using MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform based on the index test and target condition. The inclusion criteria were prospective or retrospective cohort studies or case-control studies assessing the sensitivity and specificity of anti-GBM antibodies, and the reference standard was clinical diagnosis including biopsy results. The exclusion criteria were review articles, case reports, animal studies, and in vitro studies. Quality assessment was conducted based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. The pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model. The overall quality was evaluated using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Six studies (1,691 patients) and 11 index tests were included in our systematic review. A high risk of bias and concerns regarding the applicability of patient selection were noted because of the case-control design in 67% of the included studies. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 93% (95% CI: 84–97%) and 97% (95% CI: 94–99%), respectively. The certainty of evidence was low because of the high risk of bias and indirectness. Key Messages: Anti-GBM antibodies may exhibit high sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of anti-GBM disease. Further cohort studies are needed to confirm their precise diagnostic accuracy and compare diagnostic accuracies among different immunoassays.

Download Full-text

Diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19: systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ ◽

10.1136/bmj.m2516 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. m2516 ◽

Cited By ~ 111

Author(s):

Mayara Lisboa Bastos ◽

Gamuchirai Tavaziva ◽

Syed Kunal Abidi ◽

Jonathon R Campbell ◽

Louis-Patrick Haraoui ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Diagnostic Accuracy ◽

Sensitivity And Specificity ◽

Symptom Onset ◽

Serological Test ◽

Point Of Care ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Serological Tests ◽

Immunoglobulin Class

AbstractObjectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for coronavirus disease-2019 (covid-19).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, bioRxiv, and medRxiv from 1 January to 30 April 2020, using subject headings or subheadings combined with text words for the concepts of covid-19 and serological tests for covid-19.Eligibility criteria and data analysisEligible studies measured sensitivity or specificity, or both of a covid-19 serological test compared with a reference standard of viral culture or reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Studies were excluded with fewer than five participants or samples. Risk of bias was assessed using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 (QUADAS-2). Pooled sensitivity and specificity were estimated using random effects bivariate meta-analyses.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was overall sensitivity and specificity, stratified by method of serological testing (enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs), or chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs)) and immunoglobulin class (IgG, IgM, or both). Secondary outcomes were stratum specific sensitivity and specificity within subgroups defined by study or participant characteristics, including time since symptom onset.Results5016 references were identified and 40 studies included. 49 risk of bias assessments were carried out (one for each population and method evaluated). High risk of patient selection bias was found in 98% (48/49) of assessments and high or unclear risk of bias from performance or interpretation of the serological test in 73% (36/49). Only 10% (4/40) of studies included outpatients. Only two studies evaluated tests at the point of care. For each method of testing, pooled sensitivity and specificity were not associated with the immunoglobulin class measured. The pooled sensitivity of ELISAs measuring IgG or IgM was 84.3% (95% confidence interval 75.6% to 90.9%), of LFIAs was 66.0% (49.3% to 79.3%), and of CLIAs was 97.8% (46.2% to 100%). In all analyses, pooled sensitivity was lower for LFIAs, the potential point-of-care method. Pooled specificities ranged from 96.6% to 99.7%. Of the samples used for estimating specificity, 83% (10 465/12 547) were from populations tested before the epidemic or not suspected of having covid-19. Among LFIAs, pooled sensitivity of commercial kits (65.0%, 49.0% to 78.2%) was lower than that of non-commercial tests (88.2%, 83.6% to 91.3%). Heterogeneity was seen in all analyses. Sensitivity was higher at least three weeks after symptom onset (ranging from 69.9% to 98.9%) compared with within the first week (from 13.4% to 50.3%).ConclusionHigher quality clinical studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19 are urgently needed. Currently, available evidence does not support the continued use of existing point-of-care serological tests.Study registrationPROSPERO CRD42020179452.

Download Full-text

Diagnostic Accuracy of Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy for the Diagnosis of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ◽

10.3390/ijerph182312390 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (23) ◽

pp. 12390

Author(s):

Sneha Sethi ◽

Xiangqun Ju ◽

Richard M. Logan ◽

Paul Sambrook ◽

Robert A. McLaughlin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽

Diagnostic Accuracy ◽

Sensitivity And Specificity ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

High Sensitivity ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy ◽

Confocal Laser ◽

Likelihood Ratios

Background: Advances in treatment approaches for patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) have been unsuccessful in preventing frequent recurrences and distant metastases, leading to a poor prognosis. Early detection and prevention enable an improved 5-year survival and better prognosis. Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy (CLE) is a non-invasive imaging instrument that could enable an earlier diagnosis and possibly help in reducing unnecessary invasive surgical procedures. Objective: To present an up to date systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the diagnostic accuracy of CLE in diagnosing OSCC. Materials and Methods. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were explored up to 30 June 2021, to collect articles concerning the diagnosis of OSCC through CLE. Screening: data extraction and appraisal was done by two reviewers. The quality of the methodology followed by the studies included in this review was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. A random effects model was used for the meta-analysis. Results: Six studies were included, leading to a total number of 361 lesions in 213 patients. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 95% (95% CI, 92–97%; I2 = 77.5%) and 93% (95% CI, 90–95%; I2 = 68.6%); the pooled positive likelihood ratios and negative likelihood ratios were 10.85 (95% CI, 5.4–21.7; I2 = 55.9%) and 0.08 (95% CI, 0.03–0.2; I2 = 83.5%); and the pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 174.45 (95% CI, 34.51–881.69; I2 = 73.6%). Although risk of bias and heterogeneity is observed, this study validates that CLE may have a noteworthy clinical influence on the diagnosis of OSCC, through its high sensitivity and specificity. Conclusions: This review indicates an exceptionally high sensitivity and specificity of CLE for diagnosing OSCC. Whilst it is a promising diagnostic instrument, the limited number of existing studies and potential risk of bias of included studies does not allow us to draw firm conclusions. A conclusive inference can be drawn when more studies, possibly with homogeneous methodological approach, are performed.

Download Full-text

P14.71 An assessment of the reporting and methodological quality of meningioma systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Neuro-Oncology ◽

10.1093/neuonc/noab180.178 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 23 (Supplement_2) ◽

pp. ii51-ii52

Author(s):

A M George ◽

S Gupta ◽

S M Keshwara ◽

M A Mustafa ◽

C S Gillespie ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Neurofibromatosis Type ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Measurement Tool ◽

High Quality ◽

Meta Analyses

Abstract BACKGROUND Systematic reviews and meta-analyses constitute the highest level of research evidence and for a disease with limited clinical trial activity, are often relied upon to help inform clinical practice. This review of reviews evaluates both the reporting & methodological quality of meningioma evidence syntheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS Potentially eligible meningioma reviews published between 1st January 1990 and 31st December 2020 were identified from eight electronic databases. Inclusion required the study to meet the Cochrane guideline definition of a systematic review or meta-analysis. Reviews concerning neurofibromatosis type 2, spinal and pediatric meningiomas were excluded. The reporting and methodological quality of articles were assessed against the following modified guidelines: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA), A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR2) and the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) guidelines. RESULTS 117 systematic reviews were identified, 57 of which included meta-analysis (48.7%). The number of meningioma systematic reviews published each year has increased with 63 studies (53.9%) published between 01/2018 and 12/2020. A median of 17 studies (IQR 9–29) were included per review. Impact factor of journals publishing a systematic review with or without a meta-analysis was similar (median 2.3 vs 1.8, P=0.397). The mean PRISMA scores for systematic reviews with a meta-analysis was 21.11 (SD 4.1, 78% adherence) and without was 13.89 (SD 3.4, 63% adherence). Twenty-nine systematic reviews with meta-analysis (51%) and 11 without meta-analysis (18%) achieved greater than 80% adherence to PRISMA recommendations. Methodological quality assessment using AMSTAR2 revealed one study (0.9%) as high quality whilst 111 (94.8%) studies were graded as critically low. One hundred and two articles (87.2%) did not utilize a comprehensive search strategy as defined by the AMSTAR2 tool. Ninety-nine studies (84.6%) obtained a high level of concern for potential bias as per the ROBIS assessment. One hundred and eight articles (92.3%) failed to present information that a protocol had been established prior to study commencement and 76 articles (65.0%) did not conduct a risk of bias assessment. Across the three tools, domains relating to the establishment of a protocol prior to review commencement and conducting appropriate risk of bias assessments were frequently low scoring. CONCLUSION Overall reporting and methodological quality of meningioma systematic reviews was sub-optimal. Established critical appraisal tools and reporting guidelines should be utilized a priori to assist in producing high-quality systematic reviews.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and safety of turmeric extracts in knee osteoarthritis: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

10.1101/2020.05.06.20092726 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Zhiqiang Wang ◽

Ambrish Singh ◽

Benny Antony

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Knee Osteoarthritis ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Knee Oa ◽

Randomised Controlled

AbstractTurmeric extracts have been used as a remedy for treating arthritis in traditional medicine. Recent years have witnessed the rise of different extracts from turmeric and randomised clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of these extracts for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). This planned systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of turmeric extracts for the treatment of knee OA. Biomedical databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Embase will be searched for RCTs reporting safety and efficacy of turmeric extracts for the treatment of knee OA. Cochrane risk of bias tool will be used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies, and a meta-analysis will be performed to pool the effect estimates.

Download Full-text

Acupuncture as an Add-On Treatment for Functional Dyspepsia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Frontiers in Medicine ◽

10.3389/fmed.2021.682783 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 ◽

Author(s):

Chan-Young Kwon ◽

Seok-Jae Ko ◽

Boram Lee ◽

Jae Myung Cha ◽

Jin Young Yoon ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Functional Dyspepsia ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Evaluation Method ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Effective Rate ◽

Sham Acupuncture ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Acupuncture Group

Background: We aimed to critically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture as an add-on therapy to conventional Western medication (WM) and assess the quality of evidence (QoE) of these findings.Methods: A total of 12 English, Korean, and Chinese databases were searched on December 18, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of acupuncture as an add-on therapy to conventional WM for functional dyspepsia (FD) were included. The primary outcome was the symptom score of FD. The risk of bias of the included studies and QoE were evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method, respectively.Results: A total of 22 RCTs were included. The total and individual FD symptom scores were significantly improved in the acupuncture combined with WM groups compared with the WM alone groups, except for in one study. The Nepean dyspepsia index score and total effective rate mostly improved significantly in the acupuncture group, regardless of the WM used and acupuncture type. FD-related biomarkers, such as ghrelin and gastrin levels, showed mixed results. The acupuncture group showed a significantly lower recurrence rate after 3–6 months of follow-up than the WM alone group. There were no differences in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. The included studies generally had low methodological quality. The QoE for the main findings was generally very low to moderate.Conclusion: Limited evidence suggests that acupuncture has the potential to improve FD treatment in combination with conventional WM. Furthermore, the methodological quality of the included studies and QoE of the main findings were generally low. Therefore, RCTs with a rigorous methodology, including sham acupuncture and multiethnic subjects, should be performed.Systematic Review Registration: OSF registries [https://osf.io/mxren], PROSPERO [CRD42021226608].

Download Full-text

Hip Fractures in Elderly People: Surgery or No Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation ◽

10.1177/2151458517713821 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 8 (3) ◽

pp. 173-180 ◽

Cited By ~ 24

Author(s):

Cornelis L. P. van de Ree ◽

Mariska A. C. De Jongh ◽

Charles M. M. Peeters ◽

Leonie de Munter ◽

Jan. A. Roukema ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Hip Fracture ◽

High Risk ◽

Functional Outcome ◽

Hip Fractures ◽

Frail Elderly ◽

Observational Studies ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Meta Analysis

Introduction: Increasing numbers of patients with hip fractures also have advanced comorbidities. A majority are treated surgically. However, a significantly increasing percentage of medically unfit patients with unacceptably high risk of perioperative death are treated nonoperatively. Important questions about patients’ prefracture quality of life (QOL) and future perspectives should be asked before considering different treatment options to assess what kind of treatment is advisable in frail elderly high-risk patients with a hip fracture. Objective: The aim of this review was to provide an overview of differences in mortality, health-related QOL [(HR)QOL], functional outcome, and costs between nonoperative management (NOM) and operative management (OM) of hip fractures in patients above 65 years. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in EMBASE, OvidSP, PubMed, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science for observational studies and trials. Observational studies and randomized controlled trials comparing NOM with OM in hip fracture patients were selected. The methodological quality of the selected studies was assessed according to the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) or Furlan checklist. Results: Seven observational studies were included with a total of 1189 patients, of whom 242 (20.3%) were treated conservatively. The methodological quality of the studies was moderate (mean: 14.7, standard deviation [SD]: 1.5). The 30-day and 1-year mortalities were higher in the nonoperative group (odds ratio [OR]: 3.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.43-10.96; OR: 3.84, 95% CI: 1.57-9.41). None of the included studies compared QOL, functional outcome, or health-care costs between the 2 groups. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that only a few studies with small number of patients comparing NOM with OM were published. A significantly higher 30-day and 1-year mortality was revealed in nonoperatively treated hip fracture patients. No data were found examining (HR)QOL and costs. Further work is needed to enable shared decision-making and to initiate NOM in frail elderly patients with advanced comorbidity and limited life expectancy.

Download Full-text

Diagnostic accuracy of focused deep venous, lung, cardiac and multiorgan ultrasound in suspected pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Thorax ◽

10.1136/thoraxjnl-2021-216838 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. thoraxjnl-2021-216838

Author(s):

Casper Falster ◽

Niels Jacobsen ◽

Karen Ehlers Coman ◽

Mikkel Højlund ◽

Thomas Agerbo Gaist ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Pulmonary Embolism ◽

Diagnostic Accuracy ◽

Sensitivity And Specificity ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Endobronchial Ultrasound ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Suspected Pulmonary Embolism ◽

Reference Test

ObjectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound in suspected pulmonary embolism.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane library were searched on 2 July 2020 with no restrictions on the date of publication. Subject headings or subheadings combined with text words for the concepts of pulmonary embolism, ultrasound and diagnosis were used.Eligibility criteria and data analysisEligible studies reported sensitivity and specificity of deep venous, lung, cardiac or multiorgan ultrasound in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism, using an adequate reference-test. Prospective, cross-sectional and retrospective studies were considered for eligibility. No restrictions were made on language. Studies were excluded if a control group consisted of healthy volunteers or if transesophageal or endobronchial ultrasound was used. Risk of bias was assessed using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2. Meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity was performed by construction of hierarchical summary receiver operator curves. I2 was used to assess the study heterogeneity.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was overall sensitivity and specificity of reported ultrasound signs, stratified by organ approach (deep venous, lung, cardiac and multiorgan). Secondary outcomes were stratum-specific sensitivity and specificity within subgroups defined by pretest probability of pulmonary embolism.Results6378 references were identified, and 70 studies included. The study population comprised 9664 patients with a prevalence of pulmonary embolism of 39.9% (3852/9664). Risk of bias in at least one domain was found in 98.6% (69/70) of included studies. Most frequently, 72.8% (51/70) of studies reported >24 hours between ultrasound examination and reference test or did not disclose time interval at all. Level of heterogeneity ranged from 0% to 100%. Most notable ultrasound signs were bilateral compression of femoral and popliteal veins (22 studies; 4708 patients; sensitivity 43.7% (36.3% to 51.4%); specificity 96.7% (95.4% to 97.6%)), presence of at least one hypoechoic pleural-based lesion (19 studies; 2134 patients; sensitivity 81.4% (73.2% to 87.5%); specificity 87.4% (80.9% to 91.9%)), D-sign (13 studies; 1579 patients; sensitivity 29.7% (24.6% to 35.4%); specificity 96.2% (93.1% to 98.0%)), visible right ventricular thrombus (5 studies; 995 patients; sensitivity 4.7% (2.7% to 8.1%); specificity 100% (99.0% to 100%)) and McConnell’s sign (11 studies; 1480 patients; sensitivity 29.1% (20.0% to 40.1%); specificity 98.6% (96.7% to 99.4%)).ConclusionSeveral ultrasound signs exhibit a high specificity for pulmonary embolism, suggesting that implementation of ultrasound in the initial assessment of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism may improve the selection of patients for radiation imaging.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184313.

Download Full-text

Effectiveness of Insulin Analogs Compared with Human Insulins in Pregnant Women with Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia / RBGO Gynecology and Obstetrics ◽

10.1055/s-0038-1676510 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 41 (02) ◽

pp. 104-115

Author(s):

Leyna Santos ◽

Jamilly Santos ◽

Luciano Barbosa ◽

Ivan Silva ◽

Célio de Sousa-Rodrigues ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

High Risk ◽

Pregnant Women ◽

Human Insulin ◽

Gestational Age ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Well Being ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Significant Heterogeneity ◽

Insulin Analogs

AbstractDiabetes during pregnancy has been linked to unfavorable maternal-fetal outcomes. Human insulins are the first drug of choice because of the proven safety in their use. However, there are still questions about the use of insulin analogs during pregnancy. The objective of the present study was to determine the effectiveness of insulin analogs compared with human insulin in the treatment of pregnant women with diabetes through a systematic review with meta-analysis. The search comprised the period since the inception of each database until July 2017, and the following databases were used: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, LILACS, Scopus, SIGLE and Google Scholar. We have selected 29 original articles: 11 were randomized clinical trials and 18 were observational studies. We have explored data from 6,382 participants. All of the articles were classified as having an intermediate to high risk of bias. The variable that showed favorable results for the use of insulin analogs was gestational age, with a mean difference of - 0.26 (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.03–0.49; p = 0.02), but with significant heterogeneity (Higgins test [I2] = 38%; chi-squared test [χ2] = 16.24; degree of freedom [DF] = 10; p = 0.09). This result, in the clinical practice, does not compromise the fetal well-being, since all babies were born at term. There was publication bias in the gestational age and neonatal weight variables. To date, the evidence analyzed has a moderate-to-high risk of bias and does not allow the conclusion that insulin analogs are more effective when compared with human insulin to treat diabetic pregnant women.

Download Full-text

Diagnostic accuracy of the 4AT for delirium detection: systematic review and meta-analysis

10.1101/2020.06.11.20128280 ◽

2020 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Zoë Tieges ◽

Alasdair M. J. MacLullich ◽

Atul Anand ◽

Claire Brookes ◽

Marica Cassarino ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Older Adults ◽

Emergency Department ◽

Clinical Practice ◽

Diagnostic Accuracy ◽

Diagnostic Test ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Test Accuracy

ABSTRACTObjectiveDetection of delirium in hospitalised older adults is recommended in national and international guidelines. The 4 ‘A’s Test (4AT) is a short (<2 min) instrument for delirium detection that is used internationally as a standard tool in clinical practice. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy of the 4AT for delirium detection.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, clinicaltrials.gov and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from 2011 (year of 4AT release on the website www.the4AT.com) until 21 December 2019. Inclusion criteria were: older adults (≥ 65y); diagnostic accuracy study of the 4AT index test when compared to delirium reference standard (standard diagnostic criteria or validated tool). Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were generated from a bivariate random effects model.Results17 studies (3702 observations) were included. Settings were acute medicine, surgery, a care home, and the emergency department. Three studies assessed performance of the 4AT in stroke. The overall prevalence of delirium was 24.2% (95% CI 17.8-32.1%; range 10.5-61.9%). The pooled sensitivity was 0.88 (95% CI 0.80-0.93) and the pooled specificity was 0.88 (95% CI 0.82-0.92). Excluding the stroke studies, the pooled sensitivity was 0.86 (95% CI 0.77-0.92) and the pooled specificity was 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.93). The methodological quality of studies varied but was moderate to good overall.ConclusionsThe 4AT shows good diagnostic test accuracy for delirium in the 17 available studies. These findings support its use in routine clinical practice in delirium detection.PROSPERO Registration number CRD42019133702.Key pointsThe 4AT is a short delirium assessment tool that is widely used internationally in clinical practice.This systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies of the 4AT included 3702 observations in 17 studies from nine countries.Studies recruited from a range of settings including the Emergency Department, and medical, stroke, and surgical wards.The 4AT had a pooled sensitivity of 0.88 and pooled specificity of 0.88.The methodological quality of studies varied but was moderate to good overall.

Download Full-text