Amphetamine-Related Emergency Department Visits in Ontario, Canada, 2003-2020.

OBJECTIVES: Despite unregulated amphetamine use increasing, there are limited data on related emergency department (ED) visits in Canada. Our primary objective was to examine trends in amphetamine-related ED visits over time in Ontario, including by age and sex. Secondary objectives were to examine whether patient characteristics were associated with ED revisit within 6 months. METHODS: Using administrative claims and census data, we calculated annual patient- and encounter-based rates of amphetamine-related ED visits from 2003 to 2020 among individuals 18+ years of age. We also performed a retrospective cohort study of individuals with amphetamine-related ED visits between 2019 and 2020 to determine whether select factors were associated with ED revisit within 6 months. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to measure associations. RESULTS: The population-based rate of amphetamine-related ED visits increased nearly 15-fold between 2003 (1.9/100,000 Ontarians) and 2020 (27.9/100,000 Ontarians). Seventy-five percent of individuals returned to the ED for any reason within 6 months. Psychosis and use of other substances were both independently associated with ED revisit for any reason within 6 months (psychosis: AOR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.30-1.83; other substances: AOR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.57-2.15), whereas having a primary care physician was negatively associated with ED revisit (AOR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.60-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing rates of amphetamine-related ED visits in Ontario are cause for concern. Diagnoses of psychosis and the use of other substances may serve to identify individuals who are most likely to benefit from both primary and substance-specific care.

Expert elicitation of risk factors for progression to dementia in individuals with mild cognitive impairment.

INTRODUCTION: This study assesses experts' beliefs about important predictors of developing dementia in persons with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). METHODS: Structured expert elicitation, a methodology to quantify expert knowledge, was used to elicit the most important risk factors for developing dementia. We recruited 11 experts (6 neurologists, 3 geriatricians, and 2 psychiatrists). Ten experts fully participated in introductory meetings, two rounds of surveys, and discussion meetings. The data from these ten experts were utilized for this study. RESULTS: The expert elicitation identified age, CSF analysis, fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) findings, hippocampal atrophy, MoCA (or MMSE) score, parkinsonism, apathy, psychosis, informant report of cognitive symptoms, and global atrophy as the ten most important predictors of progressing to dementia in persons with MCI. DISCUSSION: Several dementia predictors are not routinely collected in existing registries, observational studies, or usual care. This might partially explain the low uptake of existing published dementia risk scores in clinical practice.

Caregiving concerns and clinical characteristics across neurodegenerative and cerebrovascular disorders in the Ontario neurodegenerative disease research initiative.

OBJECTIVES: Caregiving burdens are a substantial concern in the clinical care of persons with neurodegenerative disorders. In the Ontario Neurodegenerative Disease Research Initiative, we used the Zarit's Burden Interview (ZBI) to examine: (1) the types of burdens captured by the ZBI in a cross-disorder sample of neurodegenerative conditions (2) whether there are categorical or disorder-specific effects on caregiving burdens, and (3) which demographic, clinical, and cognitive measures are related to burden(s) in neurodegenerative disorders? METHODS/DESIGN: N = 504 participants and their study partners (e.g., family, friends) across: Alzheimer's disease/mild cognitive impairment (AD/MCI; n = 120), Parkinson's disease (PD; n = 136), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS; n = 38), frontotemporal dementia (FTD; n = 53), and cerebrovascular disease (CVD; n = 157). Study partners provided information about themselves, and information about the clinical participants (e.g., activities of daily living (ADL)). We used Correspondence Analysis to identify types of caregiving concerns in the ZBI. We then identified relationships between those concerns and demographic and clinical measures, and a cognitive battery. RESULTS: We found three components in the ZBI. The first was "overall burden" and was (1) strongly related to increased neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI severity r = 0.586, NPI distress r = 0.587) and decreased independence in ADL (instrumental ADLs r = -0.566, basic ADLs r = -0.43), (2) moderately related to cognition (MoCA r = -0.268), and (3) showed little-to-no differences between disorders. The second and third components together showed four types of caregiving concerns: current care of the person with the neurodegenerative disease, future care of the person with the neurodegenerative disease, personal concerns of study partners, and social concerns of study partners. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the experience of caregiving in neurodegenerative and cerebrovascular diseases is individualized and is not defined by diagnostic categories. Our findings highlight the importance of targeting ADL and neuropsychiatric symptoms with caregiver-personalized solutions.

Prevalence and factors associated with polypharmacy: a systematic review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Polypharmacy is commonly associated with adverse health outcomes. There are currently no meta-analyses of the prevalence of polypharmacy or factors associated with polypharmacy. We aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of polypharmacy and factors associated with polypharmacy in a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies with no restrictions on date. We included observational studies that reported on the prevalence of polypharmacy among individuals over age 19. Two reviewers extracted study characteristics including polypharmacy definitions, study design, setting, geography, and participant demographics. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scales. The main outcome was the prevalence of polypharmacy and factors associated with polypharmacy prevalence. The pooled prevalence estimates of polypharmacy with 95% confidence intervals were determined using random effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were undertaken to evaluate factors associated with polypharmacy such as polypharmacy definitions, study setting, study design and geography. Meta-regression was conducted to assess the associations between polypharmacy prevalence and study year. RESULTS: 106 full-text articles were identified. The pooled estimated prevalence of polypharmacy in the 54 studies reporting on polypharmacy in all medication classes was 37% (95% CI: 31-43%). Differences in polypharmacy prevalence were reported for studies using different numerical thresholds, study setting, and publication year. Sex, study geography, study design and geographical location were not associated with differences in polypharmacy prevalence. DISCUSSION: Our review highlights that polypharmacy is common particularly among older adults and those in inpatient settings. Clinicians should be aware of populations who have an increased likelihood of experiencing polypharmacy and efforts should be made to review the appropriateness of prescribed medications and occurrence of adverse effects potentially associated with polypharmacy. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians should be aware of the common occurrence of polypharmacy and undertake efforts to minimize inappropriate polypharmacy whenever possible.

Mini-Cog for the detection of dementia within a community setting.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease and related forms of dementia are becoming increasingly prevalent with the aging of many populations. The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease relies on tests to evaluate cognition and discriminate between individuals with dementia and those without dementia. The Mini-Cog is a brief, cognitive screening test that is frequently used to evaluate cognition in older adults in various settings. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this review was to determine the accuracy of the Mini-Cog for detecting dementia in a community setting. Secondary objectives included investigations of the heterogeneity of test accuracy in the included studies and potential sources of heterogeneity. These potential sources of heterogeneity included the baseline prevalence of dementia in study samples, thresholds used to determine positive test results, the type of dementia (Alzheimer's disease dementia or all causes of dementia), and aspects of study design related to study quality. Overall, the goals of this review were to determine if the Mini-Cog is a cognitive screening test that could be recommended to screen for cognitive impairment in community settings. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), PsycINFO (Ovid SP), Science Citation Index (Web of Science), BIOSIS previews (Web of Science), LILACS (BIREME), and the Cochrane Dementia Group's developing register of diagnostic test accuracy studies to March 2013. We used citation tracking (using the database's 'related articles' feature, where available) as an additional search method and contacted authors of eligible studies for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all cross-sectional studies that utilized the Mini-Cog as an index test for the diagnosis of dementia when compared to a reference standard diagnosis of dementia using standardized dementia diagnostic criteria. For the current review we only included studies that were conducted on samples from community settings, and excluded studies that were conducted in primary care or secondary care settings. We considered studies to be conducted in a community setting where participants were sampled from the general population. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Information from studies meeting the inclusion criteria were extracted including information on the characteristics of participants in the studies. The quality of the studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 criteria and summarized using risk of bias applicability and summary graphs. We extracted information on the diagnostic test accuracy of studies including the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals of these measures and summarized the findings using forest plots. Study specific sensitivities and specificities were also plotted in receiver operating curve space. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 1620 participants. The sensitivities of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies were reported as 0.99, 0.76 and 0.99. The specificity of the Mini-Cog varied in the individual studies and was 0.93, 0.89 and 0.83. There was clinical and methodological heterogeneity between the studies which precluded a pooled meta-analysis of the results. Methodological limitations were present in all the studies introducing potential sources of bias, specifically with respect to the methods for participant selection. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are currently few studies assessing the diagnostic test accuracy of the Mini-Cog in community settings. The limited number of studies and the methodological limitations that are present in the current studies make it difficult to provide recommendations for or against the use of the Mini-Cog as a cognitive screening test in community settings. Additional well-designed studies comparing the Mini-Cog to other brief cognitive screening tests are required in order to determine the accuracy and utility of the Mini-Cog in community based settings.

Mini-Cog for the detection of dementia within a primary care setting.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia are becoming increasingly common with the aging of most populations. The majority of individuals with dementia will first present for care and assessment in primary care settings. There is a need for brief dementia screening instruments that can accurately detect dementia in primary care settings. The Mini-Cog is a brief, cognitive screening test that is frequently used to evaluate cognition in older adults in various settings. OBJECTIVES: To determine the accuracy of the Mini-Cog for detecting dementia in a primary care setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDLINE, Embase and four other databases, initially to September 2012. Since then, four updates to the search were performed using the same search methods, and the most recent was January 2017. We used citation tracking (using the databases' 'related articles' feature, where available) as an additional search method and contacted authors of eligible studies for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We only included studies that evaluated the Mini-Cog as an index test for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia or related forms of dementia when compared to a reference standard using validated criteria for dementia. We only included studies that were conducted in primary care populations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted and described information on the characteristics of the study participants and study setting. Using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) criteria we evaluated the quality of studies, and we assessed risk of bias and applicability of each study for each domain in QUADAS-2. Two review authors independently extracted information on the true positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives and entered the data into Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5). We then used RevMan 5 to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals. We summarized the sensitivity and specificity of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies in forest plots and also plotted them in a receiver operating characteristic plot. We also created a 'Risk of bias' and applicability concerns graph to summarize information related to the quality of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: There were a total of four studies that met our inclusion criteria, including a total of 1517 total participants. The sensitivity of the Mini-Cog varied between 0.76 to 1.00 in studies while the specificity varied between 0.27 to 0.85. The included studies displayed significant heterogeneity in both methodologies and clinical populations, which did not allow for a meta-analysis to be completed. Only one study (Holsinger 2012) was found to be at low risk of bias on all methodological domains. The results of this study reported that the sensitivity of the Mini-Cog was 0.76 and the specificity was 0.73. We found the quality of all other included studies to be low due to a high risk of bias with methodological limitations primarily in their selection of participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a limited number of studies evaluating the accuracy of the Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of dementia in primary care settings. Given the small number of studies, the wide range in estimates of the accuracy of the Mini-Cog, and methodological limitations identified in most of the studies, at the present time there is insufficient evidence to recommend that the Mini-Cog be used as a screening test for dementia in primary care. Further studies are required to determine the accuracy of Mini-Cog in primary care and whether this tool has sufficient diagnostic test accuracy to be useful as a screening test in this setting.

Mini-Cog for the detection of dementia within a secondary care setting.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias relies on clinical assessment. There is a high prevalence of cognitive disorders, including undiagnosed dementia in secondary care settings. Short cognitive tests can be helpful in identifying those who require further specialist diagnostic assessment; however, there is a lack of consensus around the optimal tools to use in clinical practice. The Mini-Cog is a short cognitive test comprising three-item recall and a clock-drawing test that is used in secondary care settings. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine the accuracy of the Mini-Cog for detecting dementia in a secondary care setting. The secondary objectives were to investigate the heterogeneity of test accuracy in the included studies and potential sources of heterogeneity. These potential sources of heterogeneity will include the baseline prevalence of dementia in study samples, thresholds used to determine positive test results, the type of dementia (Alzheimer's disease dementia or all causes of dementia), and aspects of study design related to study quality. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following sources in September 2012, with an update to 12 March 2019: Cochrane Dementia Group Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), BIOSIS Previews (Web of Knowledge), Science Citation Index (ISI Web of Knowledge), PsycINFO (OvidSP), and LILACS (BIREME). We made no exclusions with regard to language of Mini-Cog administration or language of publication, using translation services where necessary. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included cross-sectional studies and excluded case-control designs, due to the risk of bias. We selected those studies that included the Mini-Cog as an index test to diagnose dementia where dementia diagnosis was confirmed with reference standard clinical assessment using standardised dementia diagnostic criteria. We only included studies in secondary care settings (including inpatient and outpatient hospital participants). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We screened all titles and abstracts generated by the electronic database searches. Two review authors independently checked full papers for eligibility and extracted data. We determined quality assessment (risk of bias and applicability) using the QUADAS-2 tool. We extracted data into two-by-two tables to allow calculation of accuracy metrics for individual studies, reporting the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals of these measures, summarising them graphically using forest plots. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies with a total of 2560 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria, set in neuropsychology outpatient referrals, outpatients attending a general medicine clinic, and referrals to a memory clinic. Only n = 1415 (55.3%) of participants were included in the analysis to inform evaluation of Mini-Cog test accuracy, due to the selective use of available data by study authors. There were concerns related to high risk of bias with respect to patient selection, and unclear risk of bias and high concerns related to index test conduct and applicability. In all studies, the Mini-Cog was retrospectively derived from historic data sets. No studies included acute general hospital inpatients. The prevalence of dementia ranged from 32.2% to 87.3%. The sensitivities of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies were reported as 0.67 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 0.71), 0.60 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.72), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.90). The specificity of the Mini-Cog for each individual study was 0.87 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.92), 0.65 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.73), and 1.00 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.00). We did not perform meta-analysis due to concerns related to risk of bias and heterogeneity. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review identified only a limited number of diagnostic test accuracy studies using Mini-Cog in secondary care settings. Those identified were at high risk of bias related to patient selection and high concerns related to index test conduct and applicability. The evidence was indirect, as all studies evaluated Mini-Cog differently from the review question, where it was anticipated that studies would conduct Mini-Cog and independently but contemporaneously perform a reference standard assessment to diagnose dementia. The pattern of test accuracy varied across the three studies. Future research should evaluate Mini-Cog as a test in itself, rather than derived from other neuropsychological assessments. There is also a need for evaluation of the feasibility of the Mini-Cog for the detection of dementia to help adequately determine its role in the clinical pathway.

The Incremental Health Care Costs of Frailty Among Home Care Recipients With and Without Dementia in Ontario, Canada: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we investigated the incremental 1-year direct costs of health care associated with frailty among home care recipients in Ontario with and without dementia. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of 159,570 home care clients aged 50 years and older in Ontario, Canada in 2014/2015. At index home care assessment, we ascertained dementia status using a validated algorithm and frailty level (robust, prefrail, frail) based on the proportion of accumulated to potential health deficits. Clients were followed for 1-year during which we obtained direct overall and sector-specific publicly-funded health care costs (in 2015 Canadian dollars). We estimated the incremental effect of frailty level on costs using a 3-part survival- and covariate-adjusted estimator. All analyses were stratified by dementia status. RESULTS: Among those with dementia (n=42,828), frailty prevalence was 32.1% and the average 1-year cost was $30,472. The incremental cost of frailty (vs. robust) was $10,845 [95% confidence interval (CI): $10,112-$11,698]. Among those without dementia (n=116,742), frailty prevalence was 25.6% and the average 1-year cost was $28,969. Here, the incremental cost of frailty (vs. robust) was $12,360 (95% CI: $11,849-$12,981). Large differences in survival between frailty levels reduced incremental cost estimates, particularly for the dementia group (survival effect: -$2742; 95% CI: -$2914 to -$2554). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was associated with greater 1-year health care costs for persons with and without dementia. This difference was driven by a greater intensity of health care utilization among frail clients. Mortality differences across the frailty levels mitigated the association especially among those with dementia.

Use of Actigraphy to Measure Symptoms of Agitation in Dementia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and validity of actigraphy as a measurement of agitation in dementia. METHODS: Participants aged 65 and older, diagnosed with dementia, residing in a geriatric psychiatry inpatient unit or long-term care facility were included in a cross-sectional study. Agitation was assessed using the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). Actigraphy was measured over seven days and compared across groups categorized as low or high agitation based on a CMAI cutoff score of 50. RESULTS: Twenty participants were enrolled (mean age = 74.3 years, standard deviation [SD] = 8.69). The 24-hour mean motor activity as measured with actigraphy was significantly different between the low and high agitation groups (180.23, SD = 86.34 versus 81.51, SD = 30.29, Z = 2.29; p = 0.02). Most actigraph variables had significant correlations with CMAI and NPI scores. CONCLUSION: Actigraphy was highly correlated with informant-based methods for measuring agitation in individuals with dementia and actigraphy may be useful tool for measuring agitation.

Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias within a secondary care setting.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias relies on clinical assessment. There is a high prevalence of cognitive disorders, including undiagnosed dementia in secondary care settings. Short cognitive tests can be helpful in identifying those who require further specialist diagnostic assessment; however, there is a lack of consensus around the optimal tools to use in clinical practice. The Mini-Cog is a short cognitive test comprising three-item recall and a clock-drawing test that is used in secondary care settings. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog for detecting Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias in a secondary care setting. The secondary objectives were to investigate the heterogeneity of test accuracy in the included studies and potential sources of heterogeneity. These potential sources of heterogeneity will include the baseline prevalence of dementia in study samples, thresholds used to determine positive test results, the type of dementia (Alzheimer's disease dementia or all causes of dementia), and aspects of study design related to study quality. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following sources in September 2012, with an update to 12 March 2019: Cochrane Dementia Group Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), BIOSIS Previews (Web of Knowledge), Science Citation Index (ISI Web of Knowledge), PsycINFO (OvidSP), and LILACS (BIREME). We made no exclusions with regard to language of Mini-Cog administration or language of publication, using translation services where necessary. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included cross-sectional studies and excluded case-control designs, due to the risk of bias. We selected those studies that included the Mini-Cog as an index test to diagnose dementia where dementia diagnosis was confirmed with reference standard clinical assessment using standardised dementia diagnostic criteria. We only included studies in secondary care settings (including inpatient and outpatient hospital participants). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We screened all titles and abstracts generated by the electronic database searches. Two review authors independently checked full papers for eligibility and extracted data. We determined quality assessment (risk of bias and applicability) using the QUADAS-2 tool. We extracted data into two-by-two tables to allow calculation of accuracy metrics for individual studies, reporting the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals of these measures, summarising them graphically using forest plots. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies with a total of 2560 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria, set in neuropsychology outpatient referrals, outpatients attending a general medicine clinic, and referrals to a memory clinic. Only n = 1415 (55.3%) of participants were included in the analysis to inform evaluation of Mini-Cog test accuracy, due to the selective use of available data by study authors. There were concerns related to high risk of bias with respect to patient selection, and unclear risk of bias and high concerns related to index test conduct and applicability. In all studies, the Mini-Cog was retrospectively derived from historic data sets. No studies included acute general hospital inpatients. The prevalence of dementia ranged from 32.2% to 87.3%. The sensitivities of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies were reported as 0.67 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 0.71), 0.60 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.72), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.90). The specificity of the Mini-Cog for each individual study was 0.87 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.92), 0.65 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.73), and 1.00 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.00). We did not perform meta-analysis due to concerns related to risk of bias and heterogeneity. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review identified only a limited number of diagnostic test accuracy studies using Mini-Cog in secondary care settings. Those identified were at high risk of bias related to patient selection and high concerns related to index test conduct and applicability. The evidence was indirect, as all studies evaluated Mini-Cog differently from the review question, where it was anticipated that studies would conduct Mini-Cog and independently but contemporaneously perform a reference standard assessment to diagnose dementia. The pattern of test accuracy varied across the three studies. Future research should evaluate Mini-Cog as a test in itself, rather than derived from other neuropsychological assessments. There is also a need for evaluation of the feasibility of the Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of dementia to help adequately determine its role in the clinical pathway.

Relevance of frailty to mortality associated with the use of antipsychotics among community-residing older adults with impaired cognition.

PURPOSE: To examine the association between new antipsychotic use and mortality over 6 months among community-based older adults with cognitive impairment, and variation in risk by frailty and sex. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of older (aged 66+) home care clients in Ontario, Canada, using linked administrative health and clinical databases. Included were clients with dementia and/or significant cognitive impairment assessed during April 2008 to March 2013. Frailty was defined using a validated 72-item index. Exposed were those newly dispensed an antipsychotic in the 6 months post cohort entry, with no such claims in the year prior to drug index date. Two-stage matching defined unexposed clients and their index date (matching on age, sex, frailty, assessment year, and propensity score). Outcome was time to death following index date. Cause-specific hazards models were used, and number needed to harm at 6 months was estimated from cumulative incidence function curves. RESULTS: Among 4955 matched exposed-unexposed pairs, new antipsychotic users showed a significantly increased hazard of mortality at 1, 3, and 6 months relative to unexposed, with the highest risk observed in the first month (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.08 [95% CI, 1.79-2.43]). At 1 month, risk was significantly higher for robust (HR = 3.72 [95% CI, 2.45-5.66]) vs frail (HR = 1.74 [95% CI, 1.40-2.17], P = .002) clients. The number needed to harm was 22.7 and did not vary by frailty but was lower for men (14.9) than for women (35.0). CONCLUSIONS: Risk of antipsychotic-associated mortality was highest in the first month following exposure, varied significantly by client frailty, and was greater among men than among women.

Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias within a primary care setting.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia are becoming increasingly common with the aging of most populations. The majority of individuals with dementia will first present for care and assessment in primary care settings. There is a need for brief dementia screening instruments that can accurately diagnose dementia in primary care settings. The Mini-Cog is a brief, cognitive screening test that is frequently used to evaluate cognition in older adults in various settings. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog for diagnosing Alzheimer's disease dementia and related dementias in a primary care setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDLINE, Embase and four other databases, initially to September 2012. Since then, four updates to the search were performed using the same search methods, and the most recent was January 2017. We used citation tracking (using the databases' 'related articles' feature, where available) as an additional search method and contacted authors of eligible studies for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We only included studies that evaluated the Mini-Cog as an index test for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia or related forms of dementia when compared to a reference standard using validated criteria for dementia. We only included studies that were conducted in primary care populations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted and described information on the characteristics of the study participants and study setting. Using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) criteria we evaluated the quality of studies, and we assessed risk of bias and applicability of each study for each domain in QUADAS-2. Two review authors independently extracted information on the true positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives and entered the data into Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5). We then used RevMan 5 to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals. We summarized the sensitivity and specificity of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies in forest plots and also plotted them in a receiver operating characteristic plot. We also created a 'Risk of bias' and applicability concerns graph to summarize information related to the quality of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: There were a total of four studies that met our inclusion criteria, including a total of 1517 total participants. The sensitivity of the Mini-Cog varied between 0.76 to 1.00 in studies while the specificity varied between 0.27 to 0.85. The included studies displayed significant heterogeneity in both methodologies and clinical populations, which did not allow for a meta-analysis to be completed. Only one study (Holsinger 2012) was found to be at low risk of bias on all methodological domains. The results of this study reported that the sensitivity of the Mini-Cog was 0.76 and the specificity was 0.73. We found the quality of all other included studies to be low due to a high risk of bias with methodological limitations primarily in their selection of participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a limited number of studies evaluating the accuracy of the Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of dementia in primary care settings. Given the small number of studies, the wide range in estimates of the accuracy of the Mini-Cog, and methodological limitations identified in most of the studies, at the present time there is insufficient evidence to recommend that the Mini-Cog be used as a screening test for dementia in primary care. Further studies are required to determine the accuracy of Mini-Cog in primary care and whether this tool has sufficient diagnostic test accuracy to be useful as a screening test in this setting.

Computer-Based Driving in Dementia Decision Tool With Mail Support: Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Physicians often find significant challenges in assessing automobile driving in persons with mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia and deciding when to report to transportation administrators. Care must be taken to balance the safety of patients and other road users with potential negative effects of issuing such reports. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess whether a computer-based Driving in Dementia Decision Tool (DD-DT) increased appropriate reporting of patients with mild dementia or mild cognitive impairment to transportation administrators. METHODS: The study used a parallel-group cluster nonblinded randomized controlled trial design to test a multifaceted knowledge translation intervention. The intervention included a computer-based decision support system activated by the physician-user, which provides a recommendation about whether to report patients with mild dementia or mild cognitive impairment to transportation administrators, based on an algorithm derived from earlier work. The intervention also included a mailed educational package and Web-based specialized reporting forms. Specialists and family physicians with expertise in dementia or care of the elderly were stratified by sex and randomized to either use the DD-DT or a control version of the tool that required identical data input as the intervention group, but instead generated a generic reminder about the reporting legislation in Ontario, Canada. The trial ran from September 9, 2014 to January 29, 2016, and the primary outcome was the number of reports made to the transportation administrators concordant with the algorithm. RESULTS: A total of 69 participating physicians were randomized, and 36 of these used the DD-DT; 20 of the 35 randomized to the intervention group used DD-DT with 114 patients, and 16 of the 34 randomized to the control group used it with 103 patients. The proportion of all assessed patients reported to the transportation administrators concordant with recommendation did not differ between the intervention and the control groups (50% vs 49%; Z=-0.19, P=.85). Two variables predicted algorithm-based reporting-caregiver concern (odds ratio [OR]=5.8, 95% CI 2.5-13.6, P<.001) and abnormal clock drawing (OR 6.1, 95% CI 3.1-11.8, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of this quantitative analysis, in-office abnormal clock drawing and expressions of concern about driving from caregivers substantially influenced physicians to report patients with mild dementia or mild cognitive impairment to transportation administrators, but the DD-DT tool itself did not increase such reports among these expert physicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02036099; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02036099 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6zGMF1ky8).

Association between Antidepressants and Fall-Related Injuries among Long-Term Care Residents.

OBJECTIVES: Antidepressants are associated with an increased risk of falls although little is known of the comparative risks of different types of antidepressants or individuals who are at greatest risk for falls. We examined the association between new use of antidepressants and fall-related injuries among older adults in long-term care (LTC). DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: This was a matched, retrospective cohort study involving LTC residents in Ontario, Canada, from 2008 to 2014. New users of antidepressants were matched to non-users of antidepressants. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was any fall resulting in an emergency department (ED) visit or hospitalization within 90 days after exposure. Secondary outcomes included hip fractures, wrist fractures, and falls reported in LTC. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval associated with antidepressants and outcomes. RESULTS: New users of any antidepressant had an increased risk of ED visits or hospitalization for falls within 90 days when compared with individuals not receiving antidepressants (5.2% versus 2.8%; adjusted OR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.7-2.2). Antidepressants were also associated with an increased risk of all secondary outcomes. The increased risk of fall-related injuries was evident among selective-serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, trazodone, and across multiple patient subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: New use of antidepressants is associated with significantly increased risk of falls and fall-related injuries among LTC residents across different patient subgroups and antidepressant classes. The potential risk of fall-related outcomes should be carefully considered when initiating antidepressants among older adults in LTC.

'I shouldn't have had to push and fight': health care experiences of persons with dementia and their caregivers in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: Most persons with dementia (PWD) receive the majority of their care from primary care providers (PCPs). A number of challenges have been identified with providing quality dementia care in primary care from the perspective of PCP. However, less is known of the primary care health care experience (HCE) of PWD and their caregivers. We examined the primary care HCE of PWD and their caregivers in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Participants were recruited through local Alzheimer Society chapter support groups. A semi-structured interview guide was developed. Focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, anonymized, and then reviewed and coded for themes independently by two study authors. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify major themes and a model proposing the common components of a perceived positive HCE was created. RESULTS: Five focus groups were conducted across urban and rural settings. Each focus group included both PWD and their caregivers and a total of eight PWD and 21 caregivers participated. Four main themes emerged from the analysis: communication, caregiver as manager, system navigation, ease of access. The model for positive HCE included: an informed patient/caregiver; supported patient/caregiver; strong PCP-patient/caregiver relationship; an accessible provider; a knowledgeable provider; and strong communication by the provider. CONCLUSION: The HCE of PWD and their caregivers is complex and a number of factors which are potentially modifiable by PCP may improve the HCE for the growing number of PWD in primary care. Understanding these experiences may help to identify strategies to improve care and patient and provider experiences.

Meta-analysis of problem solving therapy for the treatment of major depressive disorder in older adults.

OBJECTIVE: Major depressive disorder (MDD) affects many older adults and is associated with poor medical and mental health outcomes. Problem Solving Therapy (PST) has emerged as a promising psychotherapy for MDD in older adults, although the efficacy of PST in this population has not been well described. We examined the effectiveness of PST for the treatment of MDD in older adults in a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched electronic databases to identify randomized controlled trials comparing PST to a control condition or other treatment for MDD in adults with an average age of 60 years or older. We used meta-analysis to arrive at pooled summary measures of the efficacy of PST when compared to control conditions on the change in depressive symptoms and other outcomes. RESULTS: Nine studies with a total of 569 participants (290 PST, 279 control) met inclusion criteria. Most studies administered PST in person and were between 6 and 12 weeks in duration. Meta-analysis of six studies evaluating the effect of PST on depression using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression identified a significant reduction in depression associated with PST (pooled mean difference = -6.94, 95%CI -10.91 to -2.97, d = 1.15, P = 0.0006). PST was also effective in reducing disability in studies reporting this outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Our review supports the existing research literature on PST suggesting that it is an effective treatment for older people with MDD. Further study is required to understand long-term outcomes associated with PST and its efficacy when compared to other treatments.

Initiation of Antidepressant Medication After Hip Fracture in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence, characteristics, and correlates of antidepressant drug therapy initiation among community-dwelling older adults following hip fracture. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using linked, population-based administrative data. SETTING: Province of Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Older adults, aged 65 years or older, with a hip fracture and hip fracture surgery between April 1, 2003, and February 28, 2011. The study sample was restricted to individuals who returned home following surgery and who had not been dispensed an antidepressant in the year prior to their fracture (N=25,436). MEASUREMENTS: We determined the incidence of new antidepressant use defined by the dispensing of antidepressant drug therapy within 90 days of discharge home. We identified independent correlates of antidepressant initiation using multivariate regression. RESULTS: Overall, antidepressants were newly initiated in 8.8% of older adults with hip fracture in the 90 days following hospital discharge. There was a statistically significant, 1.3-fold increase in incidence of antidepressant prescribing from 2003 to 2010. Trazodone, frequently prescribed at a low dose, accounted for 39.0% of newly dispensed antidepressants, followed by selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (36.9%). Rehabilitation admission, psychiatric evaluation, a diagnosis of dementia, and baseline benzodiazepine use were the strongest independent correlates of antidepressant initiation. CONCLUSION: The period after a hip fracture is associated with a high rate of initiation of antidepressant therapy. The data raise the possibility that antidepressants are frequently prescribed off-label in these patients. Further research is needed to investigate the safety and efficacy of antidepressant use in this vulnerable population.

Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias within a community setting.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease and related forms of dementia are becoming increasingly prevalent with the aging of many populations. The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease relies on tests to evaluate cognition and discriminate between individuals with dementia and those without dementia. The Mini-Cog is a brief, cognitive screening test that is frequently used to evaluate cognition in older adults in various settings. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this review was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog for detecting Alzheimer's disease dementia and related dementias in a community setting.Secondary objectives included investigations of the heterogeneity of test accuracy in the included studies and potential sources of heterogeneity. These potential sources of heterogeneity included the baseline prevalence of dementia in study samples, thresholds used to determine positive test results, the type of dementia (Alzheimer's disease dementia or all causes of dementia), and aspects of study design related to study quality. Overall, the goals of this review were to determine if the Mini-Cog is a cognitive screening test that could be recommended to screen for cognitive impairment in community settings. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), PsycINFO (Ovid SP), Science Citation Index (Web of Science), BIOSIS previews (Web of Science), LILACS (BIREME), and the Cochrane Dementia Group's developing register of diagnostic test accuracy studies to March 2013. We used citation tracking (using the database's 'related articles' feature, where available) as an additional search method and contacted authors of eligible studies for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all cross-sectional studies that utilized the Mini-Cog as an index test for the diagnosis of dementia when compared to a reference standard diagnosis of dementia using standardized dementia diagnostic criteria. For the current review we only included studies that were conducted on samples from community settings, and excluded studies that were conducted in primary care or secondary care settings. We considered studies to be conducted in a community setting where participants were sampled from the general population. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Information from studies meeting the inclusion criteria were extracted including information on the characteristics of participants in the studies. The quality of the studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 criteria and summarized using risk of bias applicability and summary graphs. We extracted information on the diagnostic test accuracy of studies including the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals of these measures and summarized the findings using forest plots. Study specific sensitivities and specificities were also plotted in receiver operating curve space. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 1620 participants. The sensitivities of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies were reported as 0.99, 0.76 and 0.99. The specificity of the Mini-Cog varied in the individual studies and was 0.93, 0.89 and 0.83. There was clinical and methodological heterogeneity between the studies which precluded a pooled meta-analysis of the results. Methodological limitations were present in all the studies introducing potential sources of bias, specifically with respect to the methods for participant selection. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are currently few studies assessing the diagnostic test accuracy of the Mini-Cog in community settings. The limited number of studies and the methodological limitations that are present in the current studies make it difficult to provide recommendations for or against the use of the Mini-Cog as a cognitive screening test in community settings. Additional well-designed studies comparing the Mini-Cog to other brief cognitive screening tests are required in order to determine the accuracy and utility of the Mini-Cog in community based settings.

Effects of impairment in activities of daily living on predicting mortality following hip fracture surgery in studies using administrative healthcare databases.

BACKGROUND: Impairment in activities of daily living (ADL) is an important predictor of outcomes although many administrative databases lack information on ADL function. We evaluated the impact of ADL function on predicting postoperative mortality among older adults with hip fractures in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Sociodemographic and medical correlates of ADL impairment were first identified in a population of older adults with hip fractures who had ADL information available prior to hip fracture. A logistic regression model was developed to predict 360-day postoperative mortality and the predictive ability of this model were compared when ADL impairment was included or omitted from the model. RESULTS: The study sample (N = 1,329) had a mean age of 85.2 years, were 72.8% female and the majority resided in long-term care (78.5%). Overall, 36.4% of individuals died within 360 days of surgery. After controlling for age, sex, medical comorbidity and medical conditions correlated with ADL impairment, addition of ADL measures improved the logistic regression model for predicting 360 day mortality (AIC = 1706.9 vs. 1695.0; c -statistic = 0.65 vs 0.67; difference in - 2 log likelihood ratios: χ(2) = 16.9, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Direct measures of ADL impairment provides additional prognostic information on mortality for older adults with hip fractures even after controlling for medical comorbidity. Observational studies using administrative databases without measures of ADLs may be potentially prone to confounding and bias and case-mix adjustment for hip fracture outcomes should include ADL measures where these are available.