Cited by 222Electrolyte and hormonal disordersNutrition and Health in AgingFrailty in Older Adults

Clinical symptoms, signs and tests for identification of impending and current water-loss dehydration in older people

Open access
Hooper, Lee, Abdelhamid, Asmaa, Attreed, Natalie J, Campbell, Wayne W, Channell, Adam M, Chassagne, Philippe, Culp, Kennith R, Fletcher, Stephen J +30 more·2015·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that water-loss dehydration is common in older people and associated with many causes of morbidity and mortality. However, it is unclear what clinical symptoms, signs and tests may be used to identify early dehydration in older people, so that support can be mobilised to improve hydration before health and well-being are compromised. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of state (one time), minimally invasive clinical symptoms, signs and tests to be used as screening tests for detecting water-loss dehydration in older people by systematically reviewing studies that have measured a reference standard and at least one index test in people aged 65 years and over. Water-loss dehydration was defined primarily as including everyone with either impending or current water-loss dehydration (including all those with serum osmolality ≥ 295 mOsm/kg as being dehydrated). SEARCH METHODS: Structured search strategies were developed for MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), CINAHL, LILACS, DARE and HTA databases (The Cochrane Library), and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). Reference lists of included studies and identified relevant reviews were checked. Authors of included studies were contacted for details of further studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Titles and abstracts were scanned and all potentially relevant studies obtained in full text. Inclusion of full text studies was assessed independently in duplicate, and disagreements resolved by a third author. We wrote to authors of all studies that appeared to have collected data on at least one reference standard and at least one index test, and in at least 10 people aged ≥ 65 years, even where no comparative analysis has been published, requesting original dataset so we could create 2 x 2 tables. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Diagnostic accuracy of each test was assessed against the best available reference standard for water-loss dehydration (serum or plasma osmolality cut-off ≥ 295 mOsm/kg, serum osmolarity or weight change) within each study. For each index test study data were presented in forest plots of sensitivity and specificity. The primary target condition was water-loss dehydration (including either impending or current water-loss dehydration). Secondary target conditions were intended as current (> 300 mOsm/kg) and impending (295 to 300 mOsm/kg) water-loss dehydration, but restricted to current dehydration in the final review.We conducted bivariate random-effects meta-analyses (Stata/IC, StataCorp) for index tests where there were at least four studies and study datasets could be pooled to construct sensitivity and specificity summary estimates. We assigned the same approach for index tests with continuous outcome data for each of three pre-specified cut-off points investigated.Pre-set minimum sensitivity of a useful test was 60%, minimum specificity 75%. As pre-specifying three cut-offs for each continuous test may have led to missing a cut-off with useful sensitivity and specificity, we conducted post-hoc exploratory analyses to create receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves where there appeared some possibility of a useful cut-off missed by the original three. These analyses enabled assessment of which tests may be worth assessing in further research. A further exploratory analysis assessed the value of combining the best two index tests where each had some individual predictive ability. MAIN RESULTS: There were few published studies of the diagnostic accuracy of state (one time), minimally invasive clinical symptoms, signs or tests to be used as screening tests for detecting water-loss dehydration in older people. Therefore, to complete this review we sought, analysed and included raw datasets that included a reference standard and an index test in people aged ≥ 65 years.We included three studies with published diagnostic accuracy data and a further 21 studies provided datasets that we analysed. We assessed 67 tests (at three cut-offs for each continuous outcome) for diagnostic accuracy of water-loss dehydration (primary target condition) and of current dehydration (secondary target condition).Only three tests showed any ability to diagnose water-loss dehydration (including both impending and current water-loss dehydration) as stand-alone tests: expressing fatigue (sensitivity 0.71 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.96), specificity 0.75 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.85), in one study with 71 participants, but two additional studies had lower sensitivity); missing drinks between meals (sensitivity 1.00 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.00), specificity 0.77 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.86), in one study with 71 participants) and BIA resistance at 50 kHz (sensitivities 1.00 (95% CI 0.48 to 1.00) and 0.71 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.90) and specificities of 1.00 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.00) and 0.80 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.99) in 15 and 22 people respectively for two studies, but with sensitivities of 0.54 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.81) and 0.69 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.79) and speci

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd009647.pub2

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Cochrane systematic review found no evidence of the utility of bioelectrical impedance in the assessment of hydration status in older adults in four included studies.

    “The Cochrane systematic review of diagnostic accuracy of simple signs and tests for dehydration in older adults (aged at least 65 years old) described in recommendation 64 also found no evidence of the utility of bioelectrical impedance in the assessment of hydration status in older adults in four included studies (237).”

    From ESPEN practical guideline: Clinical nutrition and hydration in geriatrics (2022) · cites this paper as [237]

    The Findings report that BIA resistance at 50 kHz was assessed in four studies, but met the review’s sensitivity and specificity criteria in only two; the largest study did not confirm its diagnostic accuracy. The Applicability section describes weaker evidence for its utility, while the Discussion says BIA assessment of intracellular or extracellular water should not be used individually. Thus the review does not support the categorical claim that it found no evidence of utility for bioelectrical impedance. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • None of the simple signs and tests was consistently useful in indicating hydration status in older adults.

    “It found that none was consistently useful in indicating hydration status in older adults (237).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Albert 1989 {published data only} Albert SG, Nakra BR, Grossberg GT, Caminal ER. Vasopressin response to dehydration in Alzheimer's disease. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1989;37(9):843-7. [MEDLINE: 2760376]
  2. Bennett 2004 {published data only} Bennett JA, Thomas V, Riegel B. Unrecognized chronic dehydration in older adults: examining prevalence rate and risk factors. Journal of Gerontological Nursing 2004;30(11): 22-8. [MEDLINE: 15575188]
  3. Bourdel-Marchasson 2004 {published data only} Bourdel-Marchasson I, Proux S, Dehail P, Muller F, Richard-Harston S, Traissac T, et al. One-year incidence of hyperosmolar states and prognosis in a geriatric acute care unit. Gerontology 2004;50(3):171-6. [MEDLINE: 15114039]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hooper, L., Abdelhamid, A., Attreed, N. J., Campbell, W. W., Channell, A. M., Chassagne, P., Culp, K. R., Fletcher, S. J., Fortes, M. B., Fuller, N., Gaspar, P. M., Gilbert, D. J., Heathcote, A. C., Kafri, M. W., Kajii, F., Lindner, G., Mack, G. W., Mentes, J. C., Merlani, P., Needham, R. A., Olde Rikkert, M. G., Perren, A., Powers, J., Ranson, S. C., Ritz, P., Rowat, A. M., Sjöstrand, F., Smith, A. C., Stookey, J. J., Stotts, N. A., Thomas, D. R., Vivanti, A., Wakefield, B. J., Waldréus, N., Walsh, N. P., Ward, S., Potter, J. F., & Hunter, P.
Affiliations
  • University of East Anglia (GB)
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rouen (FR)
  • University of Iowa (US)
  • Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Bangor University (GB)
  • University of Liverpool (GB)
  • The Goodman Group; 1107 Hazeltine Blvd Suite 200 Chaska Minnesota USA 55318
  • Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital (GB)
  • James Paget University Hospital (GB)
  • Birzeit University (PS)
  • St. Luke's International University (JP)
  • University Hospital of Bern (CH)
  • Brigham Young University (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (CH)
  • Drayton and St Faiths Medical Practice; 8 Manor Farm Close Drayton Norwich UK NR8 6EE
  • Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre; Department of Geriatrics; Nijmegen Netherlands 6500 HB
  • Ospedale Regionale Bellinzona e Valli; Intensive Care Medicine; Bellinzona Ticino Switzerland 6500
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse (FR)
  • Edinburgh Napier University (GB)
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
  • Childrens Hospital Oakland Research Institute (CHORI); 5700 Martin Luther King Jr Way Oakland CA USA 94609
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Saint Louis University (US)
  • Princess Alexandra Hospital (AU)
  • Health Services Research & Development (US)
  • Södertälje Sjukhus (SE)
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-04-30
Volume
2015
Issue
7
Pages
CD009647-CD009647
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W1910260442
Cited by
222
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Napier Research Repository (Edinburgh Napier University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Output (Edinburgh Napier University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (CDF-2011-04-025)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Electrolyte and hormonal disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
Keywords
older adults, diagnostic accuracy, serum osmolality, clinical symptoms and signs, sensitivity and specificity, reference materials, index tests, weight change, serum osmolarity, clinical decision support systems, clinical decision rules
MeSH terms
Aged, Dehydration, Female, Humans, Male, Mouth Diseases, Osmolar Concentration, Sensitivity and Specificity, Skin Physiological Phenomena, Urine, Electric Impedance, Drinking Water, Symptom Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review