Dataset Information

Risks and Benefits of Screening for Dementia in Primary Care: The Indiana University Cognitive Health Outcomes Investigation of the Comparative Effectiveness of Dementia Screening (IU CHOICE)Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background/objective

The benefits and harms of screening of Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRDs) are unknown. This study addressed the question of whether the benefits outweigh the harms of screening for ADRDs among older adults in primary care.

Design, setting, and participants

Single-blinded, two-arm, randomized controlled trial (October 2012-September 2016) in urban, suburban, and rural primary care settings in Indiana. A total of 4005 primary care patients (aged ?65?years) were randomized to ADRD screening (n = 2008) or control (n = 1997).

Intervention

Patients were screened using the Memory Impairment Screen or the Mini-Cog and referred for a voluntary follow-up diagnostic assessment if they screened positive on either or both screening tests.

Measurements

Primary measures were health-related quality of life (HRQOL; Health Utilities Index) at 12?months, depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), and anxiety symptoms (Generalized Anxiety Disorder seven-item scale) at 1 month.

Results

The mean age was 74.2?years (SD = 6.9?years); 2257 (66%) were female and 2301 (67%) were white. At 12?months, we were unable to detect differences in HRQOL between the groups (effect size = 0.009 [95% confidence interval {CI} = -0.063 to 0.080]; P = .81). At 1 month, differences in mean depressive symptoms (mean difference = -0.23 [90% CI = -0.42 to -0.039]) and anxiety symptoms (mean difference = -0.087 [90% CI = -0.246 to 0.072]) were within prespecified equivalency range. Scores for depressive and anxiety symptoms were similar between the groups at all time points. No differences in healthcare utilization, advance care planning, and ADRD recognition by physicians were detected at 12?months.

Conclusion

We were unable to detect a difference in HRQOL for screening for ADRD among older adults. We found no harm from screening measured by symptoms of depression or anxiety. Missing data, low rates of dementia detection, and high rate of refusal for follow-up diagnostic assessments after a positive screen may explain these findings. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:535-543, 2020.

SUBMITTER: Fowler NR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7187902 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Risks and Benefits of Screening for Dementia in Primary Care: The Indiana University Cognitive Health Outcomes Investigation of the Comparative Effectiveness of Dementia Screening (IU CHOICE)Trial.

Fowler Nicole R NR Perkins Anthony J AJ Gao Sujuan S Sachs Greg A GA Boustani Malaz A MA

Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 20191202 3

<h4>Background/objective</h4>The benefits and harms of screening of Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRDs) are unknown. This study addressed the question of whether the benefits outweigh the harms of screening for ADRDs among older adults in primary care.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>Single-blinded, two-arm, randomized controlled trial (October 2012-September 2016) in urban, suburban, and rural primary care settings in Indiana. A total of 4005 primary care patients (aged ≥65 ...[more]

PMID: 31792940

Similar Datasets

Project description:Dementia affects over 4 million people in the US and is frequently unrecognized and underdiagnosed in primary care. Routine dementia screening in primary care is not recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force due to lack of empirical data on the benefits and harms of screening. This trial seeks to fill this gap and contribute information about the benefits, harms, and costs of routine screening for dementia in primary care.Single-blinded, parallel, randomized controlled clinical trial with 1:1 allocation. A total of 4,000 individuals aged ?65 years without a diagnosis of dementia, cognitive impairment, or serious mental illness receiving care at primary care practices within two cities in Indiana. Subjects will be randomized to either i) screening for dementia using the Memory Impairment Screen Telephone version or ii) no screening for dementia. Subjects who screen positive for dementia will be referred to the local Aging Brain Care program that delivers an evidence-based collaborative care model for dementia and depression. Research assistants will administer the 15-item Health Utility Index, Patient Health Questionnaire, Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale, and Medical Outcomes Study at baseline, 1, 6, and 12 months. Information about advanced care planning will be collected at baseline and 12 months. All enrollees' medical records will be reviewed to collect data on health care utilization and costs.We have two primary hypotheses; first, in comparison to non-screened subjects, those who are screened and referred to a dementia collaborative care program will have a higher health-related quality of life as measured by the Health Utility Index at 12 months post-screening. Second, in comparison to non-screened subjects, those who are screened and referred to a dementia collaborative care program will not have higher depression or anxiety at one month post-screening as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire and Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale scales. Our secondary hypothesis is that screened subjects will have an Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio below the maximum acceptable threshold of $60,000 per quality adjusted life year saved at 12 months.Ongoing; registered on September 19, 2012. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: 2012 NCT01699503.

Project description:BACKGROUND: To assess and compare the effectiveness and costs of Phototest, Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), and Memory Impairment Screen (MIS) to screen for dementia (DEM) and cognitive impairment (CI). METHODS: A phase III study was conducted over one year in consecutive patients with suspicion of CI or DEM at four Primary Care (PC) centers. After undergoing all screening tests at the PC center, participants were extensively evaluated by researchers blinded to screening test results in a Cognitive-Behavioral Neurology Unit (CBNU). The gold standard diagnosis was established by consensus of expert neurologists. Effectiveness was assessed by the proportion of correct diagnoses (diagnostic accuracy [DA]) and by the kappa index of concordance between test results and gold standard diagnoses. Costs were based on public prices and hospital accounts. RESULTS: The study included 140 subjects (48 with DEM, 37 with CI without DEM, and 55 without CI). The MIS could not be applied to 23 illiterate subjects (16.4%). For DEM, the maximum effectiveness of the MMSE was obtained with different cutoff points as a function of educational level [k = 0.31 (95% Confidence interval [95%CI], 0.19-0.43), DA = 0.60 (95%CI, 0.52-0.68)], and that of the MIS with a cutoff of 3/4 [k = 0.63 (95%CI, 0.48-0.78), DA = 0.83 (95%CI, 0.80-0.92)]. Effectiveness of the Phototest [k = 0.71 (95%CI, 0.59-0.83), DA = 0.87 (95%CI, 0.80-0.92)] was similar to that of the MIS and higher than that of the MMSE. Costs were higher with MMSE (275.9 ± 193.3€ [mean ± sd euros]) than with Phototest (208.2 ± 196.8€) or MIS (201.3 ± 193.4€), whose costs did not significantly differ. For CI, the effectiveness did not significantly differ between MIS [k = 0.59 (95%CI, 0.45-0.74), DA = 0.79 (95%CI, 0.64-0.97)] and Phototest [k = 0.58 (95%CI, 0.45-0.74), DA = 0.78 (95%CI, 0.64-0.95)] and was lowest for the MMSE [k = 0.27 (95%CI, 0.09-0.45), DA = 0.69 (95%CI, 0.56-0.84)]. Costs were higher for MMSE (393.4 ± 121.8€) than for Phototest (287.0 ± 197.4€) or MIS (300.1 ± 165.6€), whose costs did not significantly differ. CONCLUSION: MMSE is not an effective instrument in our setting. For both DEM and CI, the Phototest and MIS are more effective and less costly, with no difference between them. However, MIS could not be applied to the appreciable percentage of our population who were illiterate.

Dataset Information

Risks and Benefits of Screening for Dementia in Primary Care: The Indiana University Cognitive Health Outcomes Investigation of the Comparative Effectiveness of Dementia Screening (IU CHOICE)Trial.

Background/objective

Design, setting, and participants

Intervention

Measurements

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Risks and Benefits of Screening for Dementia in Primary Care: The Indiana University Cognitive Health Outcomes Investigation of the Comparative Effectiveness of Dementia Screening (IU CHOICE)Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets