Dataset Information

Nutritional supplements for neuropsychiatric symptoms in people with dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: The aim of the present study was to assess the effects of nutritional supplementation on neuropsychiatric symptoms among people with dementia.Methods/design: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched in the Databases PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Clinicaltrials.gov from inception until January 31, 2020. Studies of RCTs carried out on people with any type of dementia who were taking nutritional supplements and had neuropsychiatric symptoms were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychiatric symptoms were assessed with the validated Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). Effect sizes were calculated with standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI), applying a random effect model.

Results: The search yielded 1034 studies with four studies being included in the meta-analysis with a total of 377 people with dementia (mean age 69.3 [SD: 7.7] years). The diagnoses comprised mild to late Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia. Two studies included a multicomponent supplementation, one an omega-3, and one a special supplement tailored for cognitive impairment. The median follow-up was 18?weeks, with a range from 12 to 24?weeks. Pooled data showed that nutritional supplementation did not improve NPI (SMD = -0.33; [95%CI: -0.74 to 0.08]; P = 0.11; I² =?45%).

Conclusions: The findings of this meta-analysis demonstrated no significant impact on NPI through nutritional supplementation. However, the generalization of the results is limited, as different supplements were used in different stages of dementia with a short follow-up time.

SUBMITTER: Haider S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7692950 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nutritional supplements for neuropsychiatric symptoms in people with dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Haider Sandra S Schwarzinger Angela A Stefanac Sinisa S Soysal Pinar P Smith Lee L Veronese Nicola N Dorner Thomas E TE Grabovac Igor I Grabovac Igor I

International journal of geriatric psychiatry 20200828 11

The aim of the present study was to assess the effects of nutritional supplementation on neuropsychiatric symptoms among people with dementia.<h4>Methods/design</h4>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched in the Databases PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Clinicaltrials.gov from inception until January 31, 2020. Studies of RCTs carried out on people with any type of dementia who were taking nutritional supplements and had neuropsychiatric sympto ...[more]

PMID: 32805754

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:In 2016, the global number of individuals living with dementia was 43.8 million, representing a 117% increase from 1990-mainly due to increases in aging and population growth. Up to 90% of individuals with dementia experience neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS). However, the limitations of current treatments for NPS have drivent he search for safer pharmacotherapies-including cannabinoids. AIM:To assess the efficacy and acceptability of cannabinoids for the treatment of NPS in individuals with dementia. DESIGN:Systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:Of 6,902 papers, 9 were eligible (n = 205, 44% female, 78 ± 7 years, 85% Alzheimer disease). Trials were in North America and Europe and explored tetrahydrocannabinol (n = 3), dronabinol (n = 5), or nabilone (n = 1). MEASUREMENT:Titles/abstracts were independently screened by one reviewer and reviewed by a second. Full-text screening was by two reviewers with discrepancies resolved via a third reviewer. We extracted data on the standardized mean difference (SMD) for several NPS instruments, trial completion, and adverse events. Data were pooled using random-effects models. FINDINGS:Cannabinoids led to significant improvements across NPS instruments, including the Cohen Mansfield Agitation Inventory (SMD = -0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.45 to -0.16), the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (SMD = -0.61; CI, -1.07 to -0.15), and nocturnal actigraphy (SMD = -1.05; CI, -1.56 to -0.54h). Cannabinoids were well-tolerated, with an overall trial completion rate of 93% (193/205) and no serious treatment-related adverse events. Treatment efficacy was associated with baseline dementia severity and dose, but not dementia subtype, age, or sex. The overall study quality was rated as low. CONCLUSIONS:There is preliminary evidence for the efficacy and tolerability of cannabinoids as treatments for NPS. Population-based studies are needed to characterize their real-world effectiveness and acceptability.

Project description:BackgroundPrescribing trends suggest that pharmacologic alternatives to antipsychotics are gaining in popularity, but randomized trial (RCT) data of their comparative safety is scarce. Our objective was to describe the comparative safety of pharmacologic interventions for treating neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, from inception to May 28, 2019, for studies of pharmacologic interventions used to treat neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia. Dementia care partners selected fracture risk as our primary outcome. Pairs of reviewers, working independently, conducted all study screening, data abstraction, and risk of bias appraisal. We conducted Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses (NMAs) using data from RCTs to derive odds ratios (ORs). In secondary analyses, we conducted frequentist random-effects NMAs using data from RCTs and Bayesian three-level hierarchical random-effects NMAs incorporating data from RCTs and non-randomized studies.ResultsOur systematic review included 209 randomized and non-randomized studies (889,378 persons with dementia). In NMAs of data from randomized trials, there were no increased odds of fracture associated with any intervention in primary analyses; however, data were sparse. We found increased odds of cerebrovascular events associated with antipsychotics (odds ratio [OR] 2.12, 95% credible interval [CrI] 1.29 to 3.62; number needed to harm [NNH] = 99) and increased odds of falls associated with dextromethorphan-quinidine (OR 4.16, 95% CrI 1.47 to 14.22; NNH = 55) compared to placebo in persons with dementia. In a subgroup of persons with Alzheimer disease, antipsychotics were associated with increased odds of fracture compared to anticonvulsants (OR 54.1, 95% CrI 1.15 to 38,300; NNH = 18). In older persons (mean age ≥ 80 years) with dementia, anticonvulsants were associated with increased odds of death compared to placebo (OR 8.36, 95% CrI 1.17 to 203.4; NNH = 35) and antipsychotics were associated with increased odds of death compared to antidepressants (OR 5.28, 95% CrI 1.06 to 3.51; NNH = 47).ConclusionAlthough antipsychotics were associated with greater harm than antidepressants and anticonvulsants in subgroups of persons with dementia, medications used in lieu of antipsychotics for treating neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia, such as anticonvulsants and dextromethorphan-quinidine, were also associated with harm. Decision-making concerning treatments prescribed in lieu of antipsychotics should include potential harms.Prospero registrationCRD42017050130.

Project description:The nature and extent of persistent neuropsychiatric symptoms after COVID-19 are not established. To help inform mental health service planning in the pandemic recovery phase, we systematically determined the prevalence of neuropsychiatric symptoms in survivors of COVID-19. For this pre-registered systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO ID CRD42021239750), we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO to 20 February 2021, plus our own curated database. We included peer-reviewed studies reporting neuropsychiatric symptoms at post-acute or later time-points after COVID-19 infection and in control groups where available. For each study, a minimum of two authors extracted summary data. For each symptom, we calculated a pooled prevalence using generalized linear mixed models. Heterogeneity was measured with I 2. Subgroup analyses were conducted for COVID-19 hospitalization, severity and duration of follow-up. From 2844 unique titles, we included 51 studies (n = 18 917 patients). The mean duration of follow-up after COVID-19 was 77 days (range 14-182 days). Study quality was most commonly moderate. The most prevalent neuropsychiatric symptom was sleep disturbance [pooled prevalence = 27.4% (95% confidence interval 21.4-34.4%)], followed by fatigue [24.4% (17.5-32.9%)], objective cognitive impairment [20.2% (10.3-35.7%)], anxiety [19.1% (13.3-26.8%)] and post-traumatic stress [15.7% (9.9-24.1%)]. Only two studies reported symptoms in control groups, both reporting higher frequencies in COVID-19 survivors versus controls. Between-study heterogeneity was high (I 2 = 79.6-98.6%). There was little or no evidence of differential symptom prevalence based on hospitalization status, severity or follow-up duration. Neuropsychiatric symptoms are common and persistent after recovery from COVID-19. The literature on longer-term consequences is still maturing but indicates a particularly high prevalence of insomnia, fatigue, cognitive impairment and anxiety disorders in the first 6 months after infection.

Project description:Nutrition plays an important role in maintaining the overall health of older people. Inadequate intake may lead to impaired body function, higher morbidity, and mortality. Oral nutritional supplements (ONS) showed positive effect on the nutritional status of the elderly; however, systematic evidence is currently lacking on the effect of ONS on the elderly with anorexia. The current systematic review and meta-analysis included randomized controlled trial (RCT) articles to investigate the effectiveness of ONS on the main aspects of anorexia of aging (AA). By using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method, researchers independently searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and other gray literature resources for publications that met the inclusion criteria by October 2020. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tools were used for quality assessment. The inverse-variance method was used for the fixed model (FM) while the DerSimonian-Laird method was used for the random model (RM). Respective 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) was used for indices in terms of effect size (ES). 2497 records were found through the systematic search, while 17 RCTs (n = 1204) were included, with a mean age of 81.9 years (range: 74-87 years). Supplementation occurred in the morning, mid-day, and evening, while the times varied from one to three times a day. The results of meta-analysis showed that, generally, ONS had a positive effect on the overall appetite, MD = 0.18, 95% CI (0.03, 0.33), p = 0.02, and consumption, MD = 1.43, 95% CI (0.01, 2.86), p = 0.05; but not significant in terms of other aspects of appetite: hunger, p = 0.73; fullness, p = 0.60; desire to eat, p = 0.80; preoccupation, p = 0.15. Additionally, it showed an increase in the overall energy intake, SMD = 0.46, 95% CI (0.29, 0.63), p < 0.001, in protein intake, SMD = 0.59, 95% CI (0.16, 1.02), p = 0.007, and in fat intake, MD = 3.47, 95% CI (1.98, 4.97), p < 0.001, while no positive effect was found on carbohydrates intake, p = 0.06. Significance differences were also found in the body weight, SMD = 0.53, 95% CI (0.41, 0.65), p < 0.001, and body mass index (BMI), MD = 0.53, 95% CI (0.12, 0.95), p = 0.01. Moreover, subgroup analyses were conducted according to the nutrient density with no positive results showed except for the low-density ONS on overall energy intake. The results of the present study indicated that ONS had beneficial effects on overall appetite, energy intake, body weight and BMI.

Project description:BackgroundThere are currently no systematic reviews or meta-analyses of Chinese calligraphy therapy (CCT) to reduce neuropsychiatric symptoms. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to explore the efficacy of CCT for people with neuropsychiatric symptoms.MethodsWe searched Chinese and English databases, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Wanfang Data for relevant articles published between the earliest year available and December 2016. The search was limited to randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical studies and the associated keywords were "handwriting," "Chinese calligraphy," "Chinese calligraphy therapy," "Calligraphy exercise," and "Calligraphy training." The 21 articles that met these criteria were used in the analysis. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist was used to assess methodological quality.ResultsCCT significantly reduced psychosis (10 studies, 965 subjects, standardized mean difference [SMD]?=?-?0.17, 95% confidence intervals [CI] [-?0.30, -?0.40], Z?=?2.60, p?<?0.01), anxiety symptoms (9 studies, 579 subjects, SMD?=?-?0.78, 95% CI [-?0.95, -?0.61], Z?=?8.98, p?<?0.001), and depressive symptoms (7 studies, 456 subjects, SMD?=?-?0.69, 95% CI [-?0.88, -?0.50], Z?=?7.11, p?<?0.001). CCT also significantly improved cognitive function (2 studies, 55 subjects, MD?=?2.17, 95% CI [-?0.03, 4.38], Z?=?1.93, p?=?0.05) and neurofeedback (3 studies, 148 subjects, SMD?=?-?1.09, 95% CI [-?1.44, -?0.73], Z?=?6.01, p?<?0.001). The therapy also significantly reduced the positive psychopathological expression of schizophrenia symptoms (4 studies, 287 subjects, SMD?=?-?0.35, 95% CI [-?0.59, -?0.12], Z?=?2.96, p?=?0.003) and reduced the negative symptoms of schizophrenia (4 studies, 276 subjects, SMD?=?-?1.39, 95% CI [-?1.65, -?1.12], Z?=?10.23, p?<?0.001).ConclusionsCCT exerts a curative effect on neuropsychiatric symptoms, but the evidence remains insufficient. A large number of RCTs are needed to facilitate additional systematic reviews of evidence for CCT.

Project description:BackgroundNeuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are common in individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia, but substantial heterogeneity exists in the manifestation of NPS. Sex differences may explain this clinical variability. We aimed to investigate the sex differences in the prevalence and severity of NPS in AD dementia.MethodsLiterature searches were conducted in Embase, MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar from inception to February 2021. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were conducted in duplicate. Effect sizes were calculated as odds ratios (OR) for NPS prevalence and Hedges' g for NPS severity. Data were pooled using random-effects models. Sources of heterogeneity were examined using meta-regression analyses.ResultsSixty-two studies were eligible representing 21,554 patients (61.2% females). The majority of the included studies had an overall rating of fair quality (71.0%), with ten studies of good quality (16.1%) and eight studies of poor quality (12.9%). There was no sex difference in the presence of any NPS (k = 4, OR = 1.35 [95% confidence interval 0.78, 2.35]) and overall NPS severity (k = 13, g = 0.04 [- 0.04, 0.12]). Regarding specific symptoms, female sex was associated with more prevalent depressive symptoms (k = 20, OR = 1.60 [1.28, 1.98]), psychotic symptoms (general psychosis k = 4, OR = 1.62 [1.12, 2.33]; delusions k = 12, OR = 1.56 [1.28, 1.89]), and aberrant motor behavior (k = 6, OR = 1.47 [1.09, 1.98]). In addition, female sex was related to more severe depressive symptoms (k = 16, g = 0.24 [0.14, 0.34]), delusions (k = 10, g = 0.19 [0.04, 0.34]), and aberrant motor behavior (k = 9, g = 0.17 [0.08, 0.26]), while apathy was more severe among males compared to females (k = 11, g = - 0.10 [- 0.18, - 0.01]). There was no association between sex and the prevalence and severity of agitation, anxiety, disinhibition, eating behavior, euphoria, hallucinations, irritability, and sleep disturbances. Meta-regression analyses revealed no consistent association between the effect sizes across studies and method of NPS assessment and demographic and clinical characteristics.DiscussionFemale sex was associated with a higher prevalence and greater severity of several specific NPS, while male sex was associated with more severe apathy. While more research is needed into factors underlying these sex differences, our findings may guide tailored treatment approaches of NPS in AD dementia.

Project description:ObjectiveTo describe the comparative efficacy of drug and non-drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia who experience depression as a neuropsychiatric symptom of dementia or have a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and grey literature between inception and 15 October 2020.Eligibility criteria for study selectionRandomised trials comparing drug or non-drug interventions with usual care or any other intervention targeting symptoms of depression in people with dementia.Main outcome measuresPairs of reviewers screened studies, abstracted aggregate level data, and appraised risk of bias with the Cochrane risk of bias tool, which facilitated the derivation of standardised mean differences and back transformed mean differences (on the Cornell scale for depression in dementia) from bayesian random effects network meta-analyses and pairwise meta-analyses.ResultsOf 22 138 citations screened, 256 studies (28 483 people with dementia) were included. Missing data posed the greatest risk to review findings. In the network meta-analysis of studies including people with dementia without a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder who were experiencing symptoms of depression (213 studies; 25 177 people with dementia; between study variance 0.23), seven interventions were associated with a greater reduction in symptoms of depression compared with usual care: cognitive stimulation (mean difference -2.93, 95% credible interval -4.35 to -1.52), cognitive stimulation combined with a cholinesterase inhibitor (-11.39, -18.38 to -3.93), massage and touch therapy (-9.03, -12.28 to -5.88), multidisciplinary care (-1.98, -3.80 to -0.16), occupational therapy (-2.59, -4.70 to -0.40), exercise combined with social interaction and cognitive stimulation (-12.37, -19.01 to -5.36), and reminiscence therapy (-2.30, -3.68 to -0.93). Except for massage and touch therapy, cognitive stimulation combined with a cholinesterase inhibitor, and cognitive stimulation combined with exercise and social interaction, which were more efficacious than some drug interventions, no statistically significant difference was found in the comparative efficacy of drug and non-drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia without a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity precluded network meta-analysis of studies comparing the efficacy of interventions specifically for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia and a major depressive disorder (22 studies; 1829 patients).ConclusionsIn this systematic review, non-drug interventions were found to be more efficacious than drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia without a major depressive disorder.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42017050130.

Dataset Information

Nutritional supplements for neuropsychiatric symptoms in people with dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Nutritional supplements for neuropsychiatric symptoms in people with dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets