![]() A positive screen shouldbe followed by a proper diagnostic evaluation using standard clinical criteria.Īlcohol misuse constitutes animportant public health problem. ![]() However, users should be aware of its limitations when interpreting theresults. Its performance in primary care patients has been varied, while it hasnot performed well in white women, prenatal women, and college students.Furthermore, it is not an appropriate screening test for less severe forms ofdrinking.Ĭonclusions: CAGE is short, feasible to use, andeasily applied in clinical practice. The questionnaire is a valid tool for detecting alcoholabuse and dependence in medical and surgical inpatients, ambulatory medicalpatients, and psychiatric inpatients (average sensitivity 0.71, specificity0.90). Results: CAGE has demonstrated hightest-retest reliability (0.80-0.95), and adequate correlations (0.48-0.70) withother screening instruments. Studies generally yielded Level IIevidence. Threearticles on reliability and 16 on validity of CAGE were found and used. Searchof the other databases yielded one systematic review and one meta-analysis, ondifferent aspects of CAGE. No systematic reviews were foundon the Cochrane Database. ![]() Methods: The Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews,Medline, Embase, and Psychinfo were searched. Purpose: To review the reliability andvalidity of the CAGE questionnaire across different patient populations and discussits role in the detection of alcohol-related problems.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |