Dataset Information

Subjective memory impairment: No suitable criteria for case-finding of dementia in primary care.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Subjective memory impairment (SMI) might be used for the case-finding of dementia. Present analyses aim to determine the diagnostic value and the predictive ability of SMI and related worries for the discrimination of patients screened positive or negative for dementia. METHODS:The analyses are based on data derived from the ongoing German general practioner (GP)-based, randomized controlled trial DelpHi-MV. A total of 5106 patients (age ? 70, living at home) were first asked for SMI and related worries and then screened for dementia in 110 participating GP practices (November 2011 to August 2014; preliminary data) using the DemTect. RESULTS:A total number of 2556 patients (50%) stated that they experience SMI and 892 patients (17%) screened positive for dementia. The sensitivity of SMI for the correct classification of positively screened patients was 54%, the positive predictive value (PPV) 19%. The specificity of SMI was 51%; the negative predictive value (NPV) 84%. Among 2480 patients with SMI, 45% reported SMI-related worries (sensitivity 52%; specificity 57%; PPV 22%; NPV 84%). Receiver operating characteristics analyses showed no statistically significant improvement in the area under the curves when using SMI or related worries as predictors (additional to age and sex) for the discrimination between positively and negatively screened patients. DISCUSSION:The analyses showed that the risk of overlooking cognitive impairment in the subgroup of patients who state that they do not experience SMI would be unreasonable high. Thus, the results provide clear evidence that neither SMI nor related worries can be used as a valid criteria to decide whether an elderly primary care patient should be tested for dementia. TRIALS REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01401582.

SUBMITTER: Eichler T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4876911 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Subjective memory impairment: No suitable criteria for case-finding of dementia in primary care.

Eichler Tilly T Thyrian Jochen René JR Hertel Johannes J Wucherer Diana D Michalowsky Bernhard B Reiner Katinka K Dreier Adina A Kilimann Ingo I Teipel Stefan S Hoffmann Wolfgang W

Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 20150430 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>Subjective memory impairment (SMI) might be used for the case-finding of dementia. Present analyses aim to determine the diagnostic value and the predictive ability of SMI and related worries for the discrimination of patients screened positive or negative for dementia.<h4>Methods</h4>The analyses are based on data derived from the ongoing German general practioner (GP)-based, randomized controlled trial DelpHi-MV. A total of 5106 patients (age ≥ 70, living at home) were fir ...[more]

PMID: 27239503

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeDespite a call for earlier diagnosis of dementia, the diagnostic yield of case finding and its impact on the mental health of patients and relatives are unclear. This study assessed the effect of a two-component intervention of case finding and subsequent care on these outcomes.MethodsIn a cluster RCT we assessed whether education of family physicians (FPs; trial stage 1) resulted in more mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia diagnoses among older persons in whom FPs suspected cognitive decline and whether case finding by a practice nurse and the FP (trial stage 2) added to this number of diagnoses. In addition, we assessed mental health effects of case finding and subsequent care (trial stage 2). FPs of 15 primary care practices (PCPs = clusters) judged the cognitive status of all persons ≥ 65 years. The primary outcome, new MCI and dementia diagnoses by FPs after 12 months as indicated on a list, was assessed among all persons in whom FPs suspected cognitive impairment but without a formal diagnosis of dementia. The secondary outcome, mental health of patients and their relatives, was assessed among persons consenting to participate in trial stage 2. Trial stage 1 consisted of either intervention component 1: training FPs to diagnose MCI and dementia, or control: no training. Trial stage 2 consisted of either intervention component 2: case finding of MCI and dementia and care by a trained nurse and the FP, or control: care as usual.ResultsSeven PCPs were randomized to the intervention; eight to the control condition. MCI or dementia was diagnosed in 42.3% (138/326) of persons in the intervention, and in 30.5% (98/321) in the control group (estimated difference GEE: 10.8%, OR: 1.51, 95%-CI 0.60-3.76). Among patients and relatives who consented to stage 2 of the trial (n = 145; 25%), there were no differences in mental health between the intervention and control group.ConclusionsWe found a non-significant increase in the number of new MCI diagnoses. As we cannot exclude a clinically relevant effect, a larger study is warranted to replicate ours.Trial registrationNederlands Trial Register NTR3389.

Project description:Currently less than half of the estimated number of people with dementia in England receive a formal diagnosis of dementia or have contact with specialist dementia services. Case finding focused on high risk groups may be an effective way to identify the undiagnosed. This joint Surrey Downs Clinical Commissioning Group and Surrey and Borders NHS Foundation Trust quality improvement project aimed to increase the rate of dementia diagnosis across Surrey Downs using specialist link nurses (SLNs). Thirty three GP surgeries covering the entire Surrey Downs area took part in the project. Individuals at high risk of developing dementia were identified from GP electronic disease registers, and were offered screening at their GP practices by SLNs, using a combination of mini cognitive test (Mini-Cog) and functional assessment questionnaire (FAQ). Suitable individuals who screened positive were seen by their GP and where appropriate referred to secondary care services for further evaluation. Based on the presence of risk factors, 6657 (11.9%) people were identified from a total population of 55 845 over 65s, and 1980 (29.7%) completed the screening assessment. Three hundred and fifty eight (18.1%) individuals screened positive and were referred to their GP, who referred 205 (57.2%) of them to the memory services for further assessment. Of those referred, 164 (80%) had a comprehensive specialist assessment. Forty one (20%) declined further assessment, and their GPs were informed. The mean age of the cohort who completed the comprehensive assessment was 82.3 years (SD=4.26), and were predominantly white and male. Fifty four (32.9%) had mild cognitive disorder (MCD), and 101 (61.6%) patients were diagnosed with dementia. The most common dementia was mixed type (43; 42.6%), followed by Alzheimer's dementia (32; 31.7%). The most common risk factor among patients with cognitive impairment (MCD or dementia) was hypertension (69; 44.5 %), followed by ischemic heart disease (64, 41.3%). Nurse led case finding for cognitive impairment in a high risk population identifies people with dementia who are not yet formally diagnosed. The combined use of brief instruments to assess cognitive functioning and functional capabilities is helpful in identifying individuals with possible dementia.

Project description:ObjectiveFamilial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a common inherited disorder causing premature coronary heart disease (CHD) and death. We have developed the novel Familial Hypercholesterolaemia Case Ascertainment Tool (FAMCAT 1) case-finding algorithm for application in primary care, to improve detection of FH. The performance of this algorithm was further improved by including personal history of premature CHD (FAMCAT 2 algorithm). This study has evaluated their performance, at 95% specificity, to detect genetically confirmed FH in the general population. We also compared these algorithms to established clinical case-finding criteria.MethodsProspective validation study, in 14 general practices, recruiting participants from the general adult population with cholesterol documented. For 260 participants with available health records, we determined possible FH cases based on FAMCAT thresholds, Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) score, Simon-Broome criteria and recommended cholesterol thresholds (total cholesterol >9.0 mmol/L if ≥30 years or >7.5 mmol/L if <30 years), using clinical data from electronic and manual extraction of patient records and family history questionnaires. The reference standard was genetic testing. We examined detection rate (DR), sensitivity and specificity for each case-finding criteria.ResultsAt 95% specificity, FAMCAT 1 had a DR of 27.8% (95% CI 12.5% to 50.9%) with sensitivity of 31.2% (95% CI 11.0% to 58.7%); while FAMCAT 2 had a DR of 45.8% (95% CI 27.9% to 64.9%) with sensitivity of 68.8% (95% CI 41.3% to 89.0%). DLCN score ≥6 points yielded a DR of 35.3% (95% CI 17.3% to 58.7%) and sensitivity of 37.5% (95% CI 15.2% to 64.6%). Using recommended cholesterol thresholds resulted in DR of 28.0% (95% CI 14.3% to 47.6%) with sensitivity of 43.8% (95% CI 19.8% to 70.1%). Simon-Broome criteria had lower DR 11.3% (95% CI 6.0% to 20.0%) and specificity 70.9% (95% CI 64.8% to 76.5%) but higher sensitivity of 56.3% (95% CI 29.9% to 80.2%).ConclusionsIn primary care, in patients with cholesterol documented, FAMCAT 2 performs better than other case-finding criteria for detecting genetically confirmed FH, with no prior clinical review required for case finding.Trial registration numberNCT03934320.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:In 2012-2013, the English National Health Service mandated hospitals to conduct systematic case-finding of people with dementia among older people with unplanned admissions. The method was not defined. The aim of this study was to understand current approaches to dementia case-finding in acute hospitals in England and explore the views of healthcare professionals on perceived benefits and challenges. DESIGN:Qualitative study involving interviews, focus groups and thematic content analysis. SETTING:Primary care and secondary care across six counties in the East of England. PARTICIPANTS:Hospital staff involved in dementia case-finding and primary care staff in the catchment areas of those hospitals. RESULTS:We recruited 23 hospital staff and 36 primary care staff, including 30 general practitioners (GPs). Analysis resulted in three themes: (1) lack of consistent approaches in case-finding processes, (2) barriers between primary care and secondary care which impact on case-finding outcomes and (3) perceptions of rationale, aims and impacts of case-finding. The study shows that there were variations in how well hospitals recorded and reported outcomes to GPs. Barriers between primary care and secondary care, including GPs' lack of access to hospital investigations and lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities, impacted case-finding outcomes. Staff in secondary care were more positive about the initiative than primary care staff, and there were conflicting priorities for primary care and secondary care regarding case-finding. CONCLUSIONS:The study suggests a more evidence-based approach was needed to justify approaches to dementia case-finding. Information communicated to primary care from hospitals needs to be comprehensive, appropriate and consistent before GPs can effectively plan further investigation, treatment or care. Follow-up in primary care further requires access to options for postdiagnostic support. There is a need to evaluate the outcomes for patients and the economic impact on health and care services across settings.

Project description:Background and purposeTo reduce the diagnostic gap of dementia, three strategies can be employed for case finding of cognitive impairment in ambulatory care settings, namely using informant report, brief cognitive test or a combination of informant report and brief cognitive test. The right strategy to adopt across different healthcare settings remains unclear. This diagnostic study compared the performance of the three strategies for detecting dementia (primary aim), as well as for detecting both mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia (secondary aim).MethodsParticipants aged ≥65 years (n = 11 057) were recruited from Alzheimer's Disease Centers across the USA. Participants provided data on an informant report (Functional Activities Questionnaire), brief cognitive test (four-item short variant of Montreal Cognitive Assessment) and a combined measure with informant report and brief cognitive test (sum of Functional Activities Questionnaire and Montreal Cognitive Assessment short variant). They also received standardized assessments (clinical history, physical examination and neuropsychological testing) to diagnose MCI and dementia. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) of the three strategies were compared using the DeLong method, with AUC > 90% indicating excellent performance.ResultsAll three strategies had excellent performance in detecting dementia, although informant report [AUC, 95.9%; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 95.4-96.3%] was significantly better than brief cognitive test (AUC, 93.0%; 95% CI, 92.4-93.6%) and the combined measure had the best performance (AUC, 97.0%; 95% CI, 96.7-97.4%). However, to detect both MCI and dementia, only the combined measure had excellent performance (AUC, 93.0%; 95% CI, 92.5-93.4%), whereas stand-alone informant report or brief cognitive test performed suboptimally (AUC < 90%). Performance of the three strategies was not affected by participants' age, educational attainment or underlying prevalence of MCI and dementia.ConclusionsFor case finding of dementia in ambulatory care settings, informant reports would suffice as first-line measures and brief cognitive tests may optionally be added on, in services with available resources, to further improve the accuracy of detection. For case finding of both MCI and dementia, a combination of informant reports and brief cognitive tests remains the most appropriate strategy.

Project description:BackgroundInterest in electronic health (eHealth) technologies to screen for and treat a variety of medical and mental health problems is growing exponentially. However, no studies to date have investigated the feasibility of using such e-tools for older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to describe patterns of Internet use, as well as interest in and preferences for eHealth technologies among older adults with varying degrees of cognitive impairment.MethodsA total of 221 participants (mean age=67.6 years) attending the Healthy Brain Ageing Clinic at the University of Sydney, a specialist mood and memory clinic for adults ≥50 years of age, underwent comprehensive clinical and neuropsychological assessment and completed a 20-item self-report survey investigating current technology use and interest in eHealth technologies. Descriptive statistics and Fisher exact tests were used to characterize the findings, including variability in the results based on demographic and diagnostic factors, with diagnoses including subjective cognitive impairment (SCI), MCI, and dementia.ResultsThe sample comprised 27.6% (61/221) SCI, 62.0% (137/221) MCI, and 10.4% (23/221) dementia (mean Mini-Mental State Examination=28.2). The majority of participants reported using mobile phones (201/220, 91.4%) and computers (167/194, 86.1%) routinely, with most respondents having access to the Internet at home (204/220, 92.6%). Variability was evident in the use of computers, mobile phones, and health-related websites in relation to sociodemographic factors, with younger, employed respondents with higher levels of education being more likely to utilize these technologies. Whereas most respondents used email (196/217, 90.3%), the use of social media websites was relatively uncommon. The eHealth intervention of most interest to the broader sample was memory strategy training, with 82.7% (172/208) of participants reporting they would utilize this form of intervention. Preferences for other eHealth interventions varied in relation to educational level, with university-educated participants expressing greater interest in interventions related to mood (P=.01), socialization (P=.02), memory (P=.01), and computer-based exercises (P=.046). eHealth preferences also varied in association, with diagnosis for interventions targeting sleep (P=.01), nutrition (P=.004), vascular risk factors (P=.03), and memory (P=.02).ConclusionsTechnology use is pervasive among older adults with cognitive impairment, though variability was noted in relation to age, education, vocational status, and diagnosis. There is also significant interest in Web-based interventions targeting cognition and memory, as well as other risk factors for cognitive decline, highlighting the urgent need for the development, implementation, and study of eHealth technologies tailored specifically to older adults, including those with MCI and early dementia. Strategies to promote eHealth use among older adults who are retired or have lower levels of education will also need to be considered.

Dataset Information

Subjective memory impairment: No suitable criteria for case-finding of dementia in primary care.

Publications

Subjective memory impairment: No suitable criteria for case-finding of dementia in primary care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets