早期干预训练对改善重症患者认知功能损害的影响

Effects of early intervention training on cognitive impairment in critical patients

目的探讨重症患者认知功能损害的临床特征,以及早期认知干预训练在改善重症患者认知功能损害中的作用。方法采用前瞻性队列研究方法,选择2015年1月至2018年6月合肥市第二人民医院重症医学科(ICU)收治的133例意识清楚、智力正常的重症患者作为研究对象。按照入选研究的时间顺序编号,依据随机数字表法将患者分为对照组(66例)和认知干预组(67例)。两组患者入ICU 24 h内均接受蒙特利尔认知评估量表(MoCA量表)评分。应用认知干预训练计划(包括音乐演奏训练、单词学习、钟表记忆绘画训练、心理健康状态干预)对认知干预组患者进行认知训练,连续2个月(如患者转出ICU则训练完成进入随访);对照组不进行任何认知干预措施。2个月后采用MoCA量表评分评估两组患者的认知功能;另外根据患者不同年龄段进行亚组分析(20~40岁、41~60岁、61~80岁),探讨认知干预训练对不同年龄段重症患者认知功能的改善作用。根据患者或其亲属对患者2个月后生活能力的主观评价,绘制受试者工作特征曲线(ROC),评估MoCA量表总分对患者生活能力的预测价值。结果 133例重症患者均纳入最终分析。两组患者性别、年龄、受教育年限、合并症、ICU住院时间、镇静镇痛药物使用情况等比较差异均无统计学意义,说明两组资料均衡可比。两组患者入ICU 24 h内MoCA量表总分及其各子项认知领域评分比较差异均无统计学意义。2个月后随访结果显示,认知干预组患者认知功能损害发生率明显低于对照组〔38.8%(26/67)比60.6%(40/66),χ2=6.321,P=0.015〕;认知干预组患者的MoCA量表总分及其视空间与执行能力、记忆力、注意力、定向能力4个子项认知领域评分均明显高于对照组〔MoCA量表总分(分):26.73±1.92比24.95±2.26,视空间与执行能力(分):4.39±0.70比3.95±0.88,记忆力(分):8.91±1.03比8.24±1.37,注意力(分):5.21±0.77比4.79±1.00,定向能力(分):5.67±0.53比5.44±0.68,均P<0.05〕,而语言能力差异无统计学意义(分:2.55±0.56比2.53±0.56,P>0.05)。亚组分析显示,认知干预组20~40岁重症患者(20例)2个月后MoCA量表总分提高了(2.10±1.55)分,且明显高于对照组〔21例;(0.24±2.76)分,P<0.05〕;而随着患者年龄增长,41~60岁(20例)、61~80岁(27例)重症患者认知干预训练后MoCA量表总分改善程度较20~40岁患者明显降低(分:0.43±1.47、-1.91±2.20比2.10±1.55,均P<0.05),且明显低于对照组41~60岁(21例)、61~80岁(24例)重症患者(分:-0.78±1.38、-4.41±2.17,均P<0.01),提示认知干预训练对年轻重症患者认知功能恢复具有积极作用。ROC曲线分析显示,MoCA量表总分预测重症患者认知干预后生活能力的ROC曲线下面积(AUC)为0.732,95%可信区间(95%CI)=0.646~0.819;最佳截断值为24.5分时,其敏感度为89.3%,特异度为60.2%,阳性预测值为85.7%,阴性预测值为80.8%。结论早期认知干预训练可以显著减轻ICU重症患者认知功能的损害程度,尤其对视空间与执行能力、记忆力、注意力和定向能力4个方面有显著保护作用。认知训练对20~40岁的年轻重症患者的认知功能恢复具有积极作用。

Objective To investigate the characteristics of cognitive impairment in critical patients, and to explore the role of early cognitive intervention training in improving cognitive impairment in critical patients. Methods A prospective cohort study was conducted. 133 patients in conscious and normal intelligence admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) of Hefei Second People's Hospital from January 2015 to June 2018 were enrolled. The patients were divided into control group (n = 66) and cognitive intervention group (n = 67) according to random number table based on chronological number for entry into the study. Cognitive function was assessed by Montreal cognitive assessment scale (MoCA scale) within 24 hours after ICU admission. The patients in the cognitive intervention group received a series of scientifically designed cognitive training sessions (playing electronic musical keyboard, learning simple Spanish, clock-drawing, psychological intervention) for 2 months, and follow-up was completed if the patient was discharged from ICU. While the patients in the control group did not undertake any cognitive training. After 2 months, the cognitive function of patients in both groups were assessed with MoCA scale. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to different age groups (20-40 years old, 41-60 years old, 61-80 years old) to explore the effect of cognitive intervention training in different age groups. According to the subjective evaluation of the patient's ability to live 2 months after cognitive intervention by the patient or his relatives, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted to evaluate the predictive value of the total score of MoCA for patients' ability to live after cognitive intervention. Results 133 critical patients were enrolled in the final analysis. There was no significant difference in gender, age, education, complications, ICU hospitalization, sedative or analgesic drug usage between the two groups, indicating that the data of the two groups were balanced and comparable. No significant difference in MoCA scale total score or sub-item cognitive domain score within 24 hours of ICU admission was found between the two groups. After 2 months of intervention, the incidence of cognitive impairment in the cognitive intervention group was significantly lower than that in the control group [38.8%(26/67) vs. 60.6%(40/66),χ2 = 6.321, P = 0.015]. The total score of MoCA scale and four sub-item cognitive domain scores including visual space and execution power, protection of memory, attention execution, and orientation in the cognitive intervention group were significant higher than those in the control group (MoCA scale total score: 26.73±1.92 vs. 24.95±2.26, visual space and executive power score: 4.39±0.70 vs. 3.95±0.88, protection of memory score: 8.91±1.03 vs. 8.24±1.37, attention execution score: 5.21±0.77 vs. 4.79±1.00, orientation score: 5.67±0.53 vs. 5.44±0.68, all P < 0.05), but no significant difference was found in verbal skills score (2.55±0.56 vs. 2.53±0.56, P > 0.05). Subgroup analysis showed that the total MoCA scale score of the younger sample (20-40 years old, n = 20) was recovered by 2.10±1.55 in the cognitive intervention group after 2 months of cognitive intervention, which was significantly higher than that in the control group (n = 21;0.24±2.76, P < 0.05). In the middle-aged and the older population [aged 41-60 years old (n = 20) and 61-80 years old (n = 27)], the total MoCA scale scores were recovered slightly after cognitive intervention as compared with those in the younger sample (0.43±1.47,-1.91±2.20 vs. 2.10±1.55, both P < 0.05), which were significantly lower than those in the control group [aged 41-60 years old (n = 21) and 61-80 years old (n = 24),-0.78±1.38,-4.41±2.17, both P < 0.01]. It was suggested that cognitive intervention training played an active role in the recovery of cognitive function in young critical patients. It was shown by ROC curve analysis that the area under ROC curve (AUC) of MoCA scale total score for predicting daily life ability after cognitive intervention was 0.732 with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) of 0.646-0.819. When the best cut-off value was 24.5, the sensitivity was 89.3%, the specificity was 60.2%, the positive predictive value was 85.7%, and the negative predictive value was 80.8%. Conclusions Early cognitive intervention could efficiently abate the deterioration of cognitive function in critical patients in ICU and had significant effects on the visual space and executive power, protection of memory, attention execution and orientation. Cognitive intervention exerted significantly positive effects on the recovery of cognitive function in the younger sample population (aged 20-40 years old).