Age-related predictors of institutionalization: results of the German study on ageing, cognition and dementia in primary care patients (AgeCoDe).

BACKGROUND: In the last decades, many community-based studies have addressed predictors of nursing home placement (NHP) among the elderly. So far, predictors have not been analyzed separately for different age groups. METHODS: For a German GP-sample of 3,208 subjects aged 75 years and older, socio-demographic, clinical, and psychometric parameters were requested every 1.5 years over three waves. Logistic regression models determined predictors of NHP for total sample and for two different age groups. A CART analysis identified factors discriminating best between institutionalized and non-institutionalized individuals. RESULTS: Of the overall sample, 4.7% of the sample (n = 150) was institutionalized during the study period. Baseline characteristics associated with a higher risk of NHP for the total sample were age, living without spouse, cognitive and functional impairment and depression. In the CART analysis, age was the major discriminator at the first level (at age 81). In subgroup regression analyses, for the younger elderly (age 75-81) being single as well as cognitive and functional impairment increased the risk of NHP; in the advanced elderly (age 82+) being widowed and subjective memory impairment were significant predictors for NHP, and cognitive and functional impairment became non-significant as predictors of NHP. CONCLUSIONS: Predictors of NHP may differ in old age groups. The fact that many predictors show inconsistent results as predictors of NHP in the international literature may be attributed to the lack of differentiation in age groups.

General practitioners' judgment of their elderly patients' cognitive status.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GP) play an important role in detecting cognitive impairment among their patients. OBJECTIVES: To explore factors associated with GPs' judgment of their elderly patients' cognitive status. DESIGN: Cross-sectional data from an observational cohort study (AgeCoDe study); General practice surgeries in six German metropolitan study centers; home visits by interviewers. PARTICIPANTS: 138 GPs, 3,181 patients (80.13 +/- 3.61 years, 65.23% female). MEASUREMENTS: General practitioner questionnaire for each patient: familiarity with the patient, patient morbidity, judgment of cognitive status. Home visits by trained interviewers: sociodemographic and clinical data, psychometric test performance. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify independent associations with the GPs' judgment of "cognitively impaired" vs. "cognitively unimpaired." RESULTS: Less familiar patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.42, 95% CI 1.35-4.32, for poor vs. very high familiarity), less mobile patients (aOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.13-1.46), patients with impaired hearing (aOR 5.46, 95% CI 2.35-12.67 for serious vs. no problems), and patients with greater comorbidity (aOR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08-1.22) were more likely to be rated as "cognitively impaired" by their GPs. CONCLUSIONS: The associations between GPs' assessments of cognitive impairment and their familiarity with their patients and patients' mobility, hearing, and morbidity provide important insights into how GPs make their judgments.

Apart from nihilism and stigma: what influences general practitioners' accuracy in identifying incident dementia?

OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy of the General Practitioner's (GP) judgment in the recognition of incident dementia cases and to explore factors associated with recognition. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study, two follow-up assessments (FU 1 and FU 2) within 3 years after baseline. SETTING: One hundred thirty-eight general practice surgeries in the six study centers of a prospective German study. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were between 75 and 89 years of age at baseline and were recruited from the GPs' patient lists. In FU 1, 2,402 patients and in FU 2, 2,177 patients were analyzed. MEASUREMENTS: GPs' judgments on their patients' cognitive status as index test; at-home patient interviews and tests, consensus diagnosis as reference; validity of the GP judgment; associations between patient factors and GPs' dementia recognition. RESULTS: One hundred eleven incident dementia cases with complete data were identified in FU 1 and FU 2. Overall sensitivity of the GP judgment was 51.4%, specificity 95.9%, positive predictive value 23.6%, and negative predictive value 98.8%. GPs missed dementia more frequently in patients living alone. GPs overrated the presence of dementia more frequently in patients with problems in mobility or hearing, in patients with memory complaints, and in patients with a GP-documented depression. CONCLUSION: GPs miss nearly half of incident dementia cases. They should be alert not to miss dementia in patients living alone. Without seeking additional information, a positive GP judgment seems not sufficient for case finding. GPs should be aware of their tendency to overestimate dementia in depressed and frail patients.

At-risk alcohol drinking in primary care patients aged 75 years and older.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the prevalence and risk factors of alcohol problems among older people (especially those aged 75 years and more). The aims of this study were to report alcohol consumption patterns and to determine their association with socio-demographic variables and health characteristics. METHOD: 3224 non-demented subjects aged 75 and over and attending general practitioners (GPs) (n = 138) in an urban area of Germany were studied by structured clinical interviews including detailed assessment of alcohol consumption patterns distinguishing between abstainers, moderate drinkers and at-risk drinkers (>20 g of alcohol for women and >30 g of alcohol for men). RESULTS: A high proportion (50.1%) of the sample were abstainers, 43.4% were moderate drinkers. The prevalence of at-risk alcohol consumption was 6.5% (95% CI 5.6-7.4). Rates were significantly higher for men (12.1%; 95% CI 10.2-14.0) compared to women (3.6%; 95% CI 2.8-4.4). After full adjustment for confounding variables we found that compared to moderate drinking abstaining from alcohol was significantly associated with female gender, lower education, and mobility impairment. Compared to moderate drinking at-risk drinking was significantly higher among men, individuals with a liver disease, and current smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Multivariate analysis revealed that, apart from liver disease, at-risk drinking in a non-demented population aged 75 and over was associated with relatively good physical and mental health. Nevertheless, public prevention measures should focus on at-risk drinkers to make them aware of potential risks of high alcohol consumption in old age.

Prediction of dementia by subjective memory impairment: effects of severity and temporal association with cognitive impairment.

CONTEXT: Subjective memory impairment (SMI) is receiving increasing attention as a pre-mild cognitive impairment (MCI) condition in the course of the clinical manifestation of Alzheimer disease (AD). OBJECTIVES: To determine the risk for conversion to any dementia, dementia in AD, or vascular dementia by SMI, graded by the level of SMI-related worry and by the temporal association of SMI and subsequent MCI. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study with follow-up examinations at 1(1/2) and 3 years after baseline. SETTING: Primary care medical record registry sample. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2415 subjects without cognitive impairment 75 years or older in the German Study on Aging, Cognition and Dementia in Primary Care Patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Conversion to any dementia, dementia in AD, or vascular dementia at follow-up 1 or follow-up 2 predicted by SMI with or without worry at baseline and at follow-up 2 predicted by different courses of SMI at baseline and MCI at follow-up 1. RESULTS: In the first analysis, SMI with worry at baseline was associated with greatest risk for conversion to any dementia (hazard ratio [HR], 3.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.07-6.03) or dementia in AD (6.54; 2.82-15.20) at follow-up 1 or follow-up 2. The sensitivity was 69.0% and the specificity was 74.3% conversion to dementia in AD. In the second analysis, SMI at baseline and MCI at follow-up 1 were associated with greatest risk for conversion to any dementia (odds ratio [OR], 8.92; 95% CI, 3.69-21.60) or dementia in AD (19.33; 5.29-70.81) at follow-up 2. Furthermore, SMI at baseline and amnestic MCI at follow-up 1 increased the risk for conversion to any dementia (OR, 29.24; 95% CI, 8.75-97.78) or dementia in AD (60.28; 12.23-297.10), with a sensitivity of 66.7% and a specificity of 98.3% for conversion to dementia in AD. CONCLUSION: The prediction of dementia in AD by SMI with subsequent amnestic MCI supports the model of a consecutive 3-stage clinical manifestation of AD from SMI via MCI to dementia.