Dementia: the International Journal of Social Research and Practice, 19(3), 2020, p.736–749.
Publisher:
Sage
This research aimed to identify current national provision by health services in Scotland in relation to proactive screening and reactive assessment for people with an intellectual disability in Scotland who have, or are at risk of developing, dementia. Staff from 12 intellectual disability services, representing the 11 health board areas in Scotland, completed an online questionnaire which asked...
(Publisher abstract)
This research aimed to identify current national provision by health services in Scotland in relation to proactive screening and reactive assessment for people with an intellectual disability in Scotland who have, or are at risk of developing, dementia. Staff from 12 intellectual disability services, representing the 11 health board areas in Scotland, completed an online questionnaire which asked about proactive screening and reactive assessment for people with intellectual disability who had, or were at risk of developing, dementia as well as suggested areas for improvement. All of the areas provided services for people with intellectual disability who have, or are at risk of developing, dementia, but differed as to whether this was reactive, proactive or both. Nine services offered intervention following diagnosis. The most common elements used across both proactive screening and reactive assessment were conducting a health check, using a general dementia questionnaire designed for people with an intellectual disability and direct assessment with the person. Clinical psychology and community learning disability nurses were the professions most likely to be involved routinely in both proactive screening and reactive assessments. The psychometric properties of the most commonly used assessments of cognitive and behavioural functioning were mixed. The areas of improvement suggested by practitioners mainly related to ways of improving existing pathways. This research represents the first step in providing an overview of service provision in Scotland. There was some inconsistency in relation to the general and specific components which were involved in proactive screening and reactive assessment. Implications for service provision are discussed.
(Publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
learning disabilities, dementia, screening, assessment, learning disabilities services, service provision;
Health Expectations, 22(3), 2019, pp.475-484. Online only
Publisher:
Wiley
Background: Case‐finding for dementia is practised by general practitioners (GPs) in Australia but without an awareness of community preferences. This study explored the values and preferences of informed community members around case‐finding for dementia in Australian general practice. Design, setting and participants: A before and after, mixed‐methods study in Gold Coast, Australia, with ten...
(Edited publisher abstract)
Background: Case‐finding for dementia is practised by general practitioners (GPs) in Australia but without an awareness of community preferences. This study explored the values and preferences of informed community members around case‐finding for dementia in Australian general practice. Design, setting and participants: A before and after, mixed‐methods study in Gold Coast, Australia, with ten community members aged 50‐70. Intervention: A 2‐day citizen/community jury. Participants were informed by experts about dementia, the potential harms and benefits of case‐finding, and ethical considerations. Primary and secondary outcomes. Participants were asked, “Should the health system encourage GPs to practice ‘case‐finding’ of dementia in people older than 50?” Case‐finding was defined as a GP initiating testing for dementia when the patient is unaware of symptoms. This study also assessed changes in participant comprehension/knowledge, attitudes towards dementia and participants’ own intentions to undergo case‐finding for dementia if it were suggested. Results: Participants voted unanimously against case‐finding for dementia, citing a lack of effective treatments, potential for harm to patients and potential financial incentives. However, they recognized that case‐finding was currently practised by Australian GPs and recommended specific changes to the guidelines. Participants increased their comprehension/knowledge of dementia, their attitude towards case‐finding became less positive, and their intentions to be tested themselves decreased. Conclusion: Once informed, community jury participants did not agree case‐finding for dementia should be conducted by GPs. Yet their personal intentions to accept case‐finding varied. If case‐finding for dementia is recommended in the guidelines, then shared decision making is essential.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
dementia, participatory research, research methods, public opinion, intervention, user participation, participation, evaluation, primary care, public health, screening, attitudes;
BARTH Janina, NICKEL Franziska, KOLOMINSKY-RABAS Peter L.
Journal article citation:
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 33(3), 2018, pp.459-474.
Publisher:
Wiley
Objectives: Due to the demographic change, the global prevalence of dementia will continually rise. Barriers to diagnosis and care are still high. But timely diagnosis is associated with valuable benefits and can promote timely and optimal management. Receiving an early diagnosis is especially in rural areas a problem due to the limited access to assessments. Therefore, the aim of our scoping...
(Publisher abstract)
Objectives: Due to the demographic change, the global prevalence of dementia will continually rise. Barriers to diagnosis and care are still high. But timely diagnosis is associated with valuable benefits and can promote timely and optimal management. Receiving an early diagnosis is especially in rural areas a problem due to the limited access to assessments. Therefore, the aim of our scoping review is to investigate different interventions targeted at rural living elderly to screen and diagnose cognitive decline and dementia. Methods: A scoping review was conducted in line with the framework of Arksey and O'Malley. The following databases were systematically searched: PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect. The interventions were categorized in four main categories (interventions for general practitioners/institutions; online/mobile offers; telehealth applications; telephone-based screenings). Results: Thirty studies were included. The four categories show different scopes of application. Telehealth applications show that it is feasible and valid to diagnose dementia via videoconference. Assessments described in three other categories show that remotely used tools are appropriate to screen for mild cognitive impairment or cognitive decline, but are not valid to establish a dementia diagnosis. Conclusions: Telehealth applications can appropriately be used to diagnose dementia. However, most of the studies included only small sample sizes and did not test the applications explicitly in rural or remote populations. Therefore, studies taking these limitations into account are needed. On top, only two RCTs are included in this review indicating that more high quality studies in this field are needed.
(Publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
literature reviews, dementia, rural areas, diagnosis, screening, telehealth;
Background: many people living with dementia remain underdiagnosed and unrecognised. Screening strategies are important for early detection. Objective: to examine whether the Lawton’s Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) scale, compared with other cognitive screening tools—the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and the Ascertain Dementia 8-item Informant Questionnaire (AD8)—can...
(Edited publisher abstract)
Background: many people living with dementia remain underdiagnosed and unrecognised. Screening strategies are important for early detection. Objective: to examine whether the Lawton’s Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) scale, compared with other cognitive screening tools—the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and the Ascertain Dementia 8-item Informant Questionnaire (AD8)—can identify older (≥ 65 years) adults with dementia. Design: population-based cross-sectional observational study. Setting: all 19 counties in Taiwan. Participants: community-dwelling older adults (n = 10,340; mean age 74.87 ± 6.03). Methods: all participants underwent a structured in-person interview. Dementia was identified using National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association core clinical criteria for all-cause dementia. Receiver operator characteristic curves were used to determine the discriminant abilities of the IADL scale, MMSE and AD8 to differentiate participants with and without dementia. Results: 917 (8.9%) participants with dementia were identified, and 9,423 (91.1%) participants without. The discriminant abilities of the MMSE, AD8 and IADL scale (cutoff score: 6/7; area under curve = 0.925; sensitivity = 89%; specificity = 81%; positive likelihood ratio = 4.75; accuracy = 0.82) were comparable. Combining IADL with AD8 scores significantly improved overall accuracy: specificity = 93%; positive likelihood ratio = 11.74; accuracy = 0.92. Conclusions: the findings support using IADL scale to screen older community-dwelling residents for dementia: it has discriminant power comparable to that of the AD8 and MMSE. Combining the IADL and the AD8 improves specificity.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Dementia: the International Journal of Social Research and Practice, 17(5), 2018, p.621–626.
Publisher:
Sage
An increasing number of family caregivers are seeking services and support due in large part to the dramatic increase in the number of older adults obtaining dementia diagnoses. This paper describes barriers and challenges experienced by our research team in recruiting early-stage dementia caregiving dyads into research studies. Effective recruitment and screening strategies to address...
(Edited publisher abstract)
An increasing number of family caregivers are seeking services and support due in large part to the dramatic increase in the number of older adults obtaining dementia diagnoses. This paper describes barriers and challenges experienced by our research team in recruiting early-stage dementia caregiving dyads into research studies. Effective recruitment and screening strategies to address these barriers are also discussed. Recruitment and enrollment success depends on these strategies as well as having well-trained recruitment staff who are knowledgeable about the study and have experience working with older adults, and more specifically, persons with dementia.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 31(5), 2018, pp.725-742.
Publisher:
Wiley
Background: The increasing number of individuals with an intellectual disability who are at risk of developing dementia highlights the need to use measures with strong psychometric properties as part of the screening, assessment and diagnostic process. Method: Searches were made of clinical and good practice guidelines and English language journal articles sourced from Proquest, Web of Science...
(Edited publisher abstract)
Background: The increasing number of individuals with an intellectual disability who are at risk of developing dementia highlights the need to use measures with strong psychometric properties as part of the screening, assessment and diagnostic process. Method: Searches were made of clinical and good practice guidelines and English language journal articles sourced from Proquest, Web of Science and Scopus databases (up to July 2017) for tools which were designed or adapted for the purpose of helping to diagnose dementia in people with intellectual disability. Results: Based on a detailed review of 81 articles and guidelines, the present authors identified 22 relevant tools (12 cognitive, 10 behaviour). These were reviewed in terms of their psychometric properties. Conclusions: A number of tools were found to be available for use with people with intellectual disability; however, few were specifically standardized for this purpose which also had comprehensive information about reliability and validity.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Aging and Mental Health, 22(10), 2018, pp.1344-1350.
Publisher:
Taylor and Francis
...of having diagnoses of affective disorders. Diagnoses of psychotic, affective, and anxiety disorders, and dementia were more common among people with challenging behaviour than among those without. Conclusions: People with severe/profound ID had lower odds of receiving psychiatric diagnoses than those with mild and moderate ID. Whether this is a result of differences in prevalence of disorders
(Edited publisher abstract)
Objective: To investigate the possible association between severity of intellectual disability (ID) and presence of challenging behaviour, respectively, on diagnoses of psychiatric disorders among older people with ID. Methods: People with a diagnosis of ID in inpatient or specialist outpatient care in 2002–2012 were identified (n = 2147; 611 with mild ID, 285 with moderate ID, 255 with severe or profound ID, and 996 with other/unspecified ID). Moreover, using impairment of behaviour as a proxy for challenging behaviour, 627 people with, and 1514 without such behaviour were identified. Results: Severe/profound ID was associated with lower odds of diagnoses of psychotic, affective, and anxiety disorders than was mild/moderate ID. People with moderate ID had higher odds than those with mild ID of having diagnoses of affective disorders. Diagnoses of psychotic, affective, and anxiety disorders, and dementia were more common among people with challenging behaviour than among those without. Conclusions: People with severe/profound ID had lower odds of receiving psychiatric diagnoses than those with mild and moderate ID. Whether this is a result of differences in prevalence of disorders or diagnostic difficulties is unknown. Further, challenging behaviours were associated with diagnoses of psychiatric disorders. However, the nature of this association remains unclear.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
psychiatric care, diagnosis, treatment, challenging behaviour, learning disabilities, older people, severe learning disabilities, screening, mental health problems;
Aging and Mental Health, 22(10), 2018, pp.1254-1271.
Publisher:
Taylor and Francis
Objectives: A comorbid diagnosis of cancer and dementia (cancer–dementia) may have unique implications for patient cancer-related experience. The objectives were to estimate prevalence of cancer–dementia and related experiences of people with dementia, their carers and cancer clinicians including cancer screening, diagnosis, treatment and palliative care. Method: Databases were searched (CINAHL...
Objectives: A comorbid diagnosis of cancer and dementia (cancer–dementia) may have unique implications for patient cancer-related experience. The objectives were to estimate prevalence of cancer–dementia and related experiences of people with dementia, their carers and cancer clinicians including cancer screening, diagnosis, treatment and palliative care. Method: Databases were searched (CINAHL, Psychinfo, Medline, Embase, BNI) using key terms such as dementia, cancer and experience. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (a) English language, (b) published any time until early 2016, (c) diagnosis of cancer–dementia and (d) original articles that assessed prevalence and/or cancer-related experiences including screening, cancer treatment and survival. Due to variations in study design and outcomes, study data were synthesised narratively. Results: Forty-seven studies were included in the review with a mix of quantitative (n = 44) and qualitative (n = 3) methodologies. Thirty-four studies reported varied cancer–dementia prevalence rates (range 0.2%–45.6%); the others reported reduced likelihood of receiving: cancer screening, cancer staging information, cancer treatment with curative intent and pain management, compared to those with cancer only. The findings indicate poorer cancer-related clinical outcomes including late diagnosis and higher mortality rates in those with cancer–dementia despite greater health service use. Conclusions: There is a dearth of good-quality evidence investigating the cancer–dementia prevalence and its implications for successful cancer treatment. Findings suggest that dementia is associated with poorer cancer outcomes although the reasons for this are not yet clear. Further research is needed to better understand the impact of cancer–dementia and enable patients, carers and clinicians to make informed cancer-related decisions.
Subject terms:
systematic reviews, cancer, dementia, cognitive impairment, health care, social care, treatment, screening, outcomes, diagnosis;
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 32(9), 2017, pp.933-939.
Publisher:
Wiley
Objectives: The clock drawing test (CDT) is a commonly used brief cognitive measure. The authors evaluated diagnostic accuracy of subjective ratings of CDT by physicians (with/without specialty in cognitive neurology) and neuropsychologists in discriminating amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), Alzheimer's dementia (AD) and cognitively healthy older adults. They further compared
(Edited publisher abstract)
Objectives: The clock drawing test (CDT) is a commonly used brief cognitive measure. The authors evaluated diagnostic accuracy of subjective ratings of CDT by physicians (with/without specialty in cognitive neurology) and neuropsychologists in discriminating amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), Alzheimer's dementia (AD) and cognitively healthy older adults. They further compared the diagnostic accuracy of subjective categorical ratings with complex scoring of CDT.
Methods: Three cognitive neurologists, three neuropsychologists and six neurology residents without experience in cognitive neurology blinded to the diagnosis rated 187 CDTs (50 mild AD, 49 aMCI and 88 cognitively healthy older adults) using a “yes” (abnormal) versus “suspected” versus “no” (normal) classification. The rating suspected was combined with yes or no to obtain two sets of sensitivity estimates. The authors also used a 17-point CDT rating system.
Results: When using the categorical rating, neuropsychologists had highest sensitivity (89%) in differentiating patients with mild AD (yes/suspected versus no), followed by neurologic residents (80%) and cognitive neurologists (79%). When differentiating patients with aMCI (yes/suspected versus no), the sensitivity was 84% for neuropsychologists, 64% for cognitive neurologists and 62% for residents. The sensitivity using the complex scoring system was 92% in patients with mild AD and 69% in patients with aMCI.
Conclusions: A categorical rating of CDT shows high sensitivity for mild AD even in non-experienced raters. Neuropsychologists outperformed physicians in differentiating patients with aMCI from cognitively healthy older adults (specificity), which was counterbalanced by the lower specificity of their ratings. The diagnostic accuracy was not substantially improved by using complex scoring system.
(Edited publisher abstract)
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 32(12), 2017, pp.1392-1400.
Publisher:
Wiley
Introduction: The authors estimated the cost effectiveness of different cognitive screening tests for use by General Practitioners (GPs) to detect cognitive impairment in England.
Methods: A patient-level cost-effectiveness model was developed using a simulated cohort that represents the elderly population in England (65 years and older). Each patient was followed over a lifetime period. Data from published sources were used to populate the model. The costs include government funded health and social care, private social care and informal care. Patient health benefit was measured and valued in Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs).
Results: Base-case analyses found that adopting any of the three cognitive tests (Mini-Mental State Examination, 6-Item Cognitive Impairment Test or GPCOG (General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition)) delivered more QALYs for patients over their lifetime and made savings across sectors including healthcare, social care and informal care compared with GP unassisted judgement. The benefits were due to early access to medications. Among the three cognitive tests, adopting the GPCOG was considered the most cost-effective option with the highest Incremental Net Benefit (INB) at the threshold of £30 000 per QALY from both the National Health Service and Personal Social Service (NHS PSS) perspective (£195 034 per 1000 patients) and the broader perspective that includes private social care and informal care (£196 251 per 1000 patients). Uncertainty was assessed in both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
Conclusions: The analyses indicate that the use of any of the three cognitive tests could be considered a cost-effective strategy compared with GP unassisted judgement. The most cost-effective option in the base-case was the GPCOG.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Introduction: The authors estimated the cost effectiveness of different cognitive screening tests for use by General Practitioners (GPs) to detect cognitive impairment in England.
Methods: A patient-level cost-effectiveness model was developed using a simulated cohort that represents the elderly population in England (65 years and older). Each patient was followed over a lifetime period. Data from published sources were used to populate the model. The costs include government funded health and social care, private social care and informal care. Patient health benefit was measured and valued in Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs).
Results: Base-case analyses found that adopting any of the three cognitive tests (Mini-Mental State Examination, 6-Item Cognitive Impairment Test or GPCOG (General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition)) delivered more QALYs for patients over their lifetime and made savings across sectors including healthcare, social care and informal care compared with GP unassisted judgement. The benefits were due to early access to medications. Among the three cognitive tests, adopting the GPCOG was considered the most cost-effective option with the highest Incremental Net Benefit (INB) at the threshold of £30 000 per QALY from both the National Health Service and Personal Social Service (NHS PSS) perspective (£195 034 per 1000 patients) and the broader perspective that includes private social care and informal care (£196 251 per 1000 patients). Uncertainty was assessed in both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
Conclusions: The analyses indicate that the use of any of the three cognitive tests could be considered a cost-effective strategy compared with GP unassisted judgement. The most cost-effective option in the base-case was the GPCOG.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
cost effectiveness, screening, cognitive impairment, older people, primary care, models, social care, health care, dementia, assessment;