Differences in trajectories of quality of life according to type of dementia: 6-year longitudinal findings from the IDEAL programme.

BACKGROUND: People with different types of dementia may have distinct symptoms and experiences that affect their quality of life. This study investigated whether quality of life varied across types of dementia and over time. METHODS: The participants were 1555 people with mild-to-moderate dementia and 1327 carers from the IDEAL longitudinal cohort study, recruited from clinical services. As many as possible were followed for up to 6 years. Diagnoses included were Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia, mixed Alzheimer's and vascular dementia, Parkinson's disease dementia, dementia with Lewy bodies, and frontotemporal dementia. Self- and informant-rated versions of the Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease scale were used. A joint model, incorporating a mixed effects model with random effects and a survival model to account for dropout, was used to examine whether quality of life varied by dementia type at the time of diagnosis and how trajectories changed over time. RESULTS: The strongest associations between dementia type and quality of life were seen around the time of diagnosis. For both self-ratings and informant ratings, people with Parkinson's disease dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies had lower quality of life scores. Over time there was little change in self-rated scores across all dementia types (- 0.15 points per year). Informant-rated scores declined over time (- 1.63 points per year), with the greatest decline seen in ratings by informants for people with dementia with Lewy bodies (- 2.18 points per year). CONCLUSIONS: Self-rated quality of life scores were relatively stable over time whilst informant ratings showed a steeper decline. People with Parkinson's disease dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies report particularly low levels of quality of life, indicating the importance of greater attention to the needs of these groups.

Comorbid health conditions and their impact on social isolation, loneliness, quality of life, and well-being in people with dementia: longitudinal findings from the IDEAL programme.

BACKGROUND: Most people with dementia have multiple health conditions. This study explores (1) number and type of health condition(s) in people with dementia overall and in relation to age, sex, dementia type, and cognition; (2) change in number of health conditions over two years; and (3) whether over time the number of health conditions at baseline is related to social isolation, loneliness, quality of life, and/or well-being. METHODS: Longitudinal data from the IDEAL (Improving the experience of Dementia and Enhancing Active Life) cohort were used. Participants comprised people with dementia (n = 1490) living in the community (at baseline) in Great Britain. Health conditions using the Charlson Comorbidity Index, cognition, social isolation, loneliness, quality of life, and well-being were assessed over two years. Mixed effects modelling was used. RESULTS: On average participants had 1.8 health conditions at baseline, excluding dementia; increasing to 2.5 conditions over two years. Those with vascular dementia or mixed (Alzheimer's and vascular) dementia had more health conditions than those with Alzheimer's disease. People aged ≥ 80 had more health conditions than those aged < 65 years. At baseline having more health conditions was associated with increased loneliness, poorer quality of life, and poorer well-being, but was either minimally or not associated with cognition, sex, and social isolation. Number of health conditions had either minimal or no influence on these variables over time. CONCLUSIONS: People with dementia in IDEAL generally had multiple health conditions and those with more health conditions were lonelier, had poorer quality of life, and poorer well-being.

Health conditions in spousal caregivers of people with dementia and their relationships with stress, caregiving experiences, and social networks: longitudinal findings from the IDEAL programme.

OBJECTIVES: Longitudinal evidence documenting health conditions in spousal caregivers of people with dementia and whether these influence caregivers' outcomes is scarce. This study explores type and number of health conditions over two years in caregivers of people with dementia and subgroups based on age, sex, education, hours of care, informant-rated functional ability, neuropsychiatric symptoms, cognition of the person with dementia, and length of diagnosis in the person with dementia. It also explores whether over time the number of health conditions is associated with caregivers' stress, positive experiences of caregiving, and social networks METHODS: Longitudinal data from the IDEAL (Improving the experience of Dementia and Enhancing Active Life) cohort were used. Participants comprised spousal caregivers (n = 977) of people with dementia. Self-reported health conditions using the Charlson Comorbidity Index, stress, positive experiences of caregiving, and social network were assessed over two years. Mixed effect models were used RESULTS: On average participants had 1.5 health conditions at baseline; increasing to 2.1 conditions over two years. More health conditions were reported by caregivers who were older, had no formal education, provided 10 + hours of care per day, and/or cared for a person with more neuropsychiatric symptoms at baseline. More baseline health conditions were associated with greater stress at baseline but not with stress over time. Over two years, when caregivers' health conditions increased, their stress increased whereas their social network diminished DISCUSSION: Findings highlight that most caregivers have their own health problems which require management to avoid increased stress and shrinking of social networks.

Dyadic perspectives on loneliness and social isolation among people with dementia and spousal carers: findings from the IDEAL programme.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to investigate the impact of self and partner experiences of loneliness and social isolation on life satisfaction in people with dementia and their spousal carers. METHODS: We used data from 1042 dementia caregiving dyads in the Improving the experience of Dementia and Enhancing Active Life (IDEAL) programme cohort. Loneliness was measured using the six-item De Jong Gierveld loneliness scale and social isolation using the six-item Lubben Social Network Scale. Data were analysed using the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model framework. RESULTS: Self-rated loneliness was associated with poorer life satisfaction for both people with dementia and carers. The initial partner effects observed between the loneliness of the carer and the life satisfaction of the person with dementia and between social isolation reported by the person with dementia and life satisfaction of the carer were reduced to nonsignificance once the quality of the relationship between them was considered. DISCUSSION: Experiencing greater loneliness and social isolation is linked with reduced life satisfaction for people with dementia and carers. However, having a positive view of the quality of the relationship between them reduced the impact of loneliness and social isolation on life satisfaction. Findings suggest the need to consider the experiences of both the person with dementia and the carer when investigating the impact of loneliness and social isolation. Individual interventions to mitigate loneliness or isolation may enhance life satisfaction for both partners and not simply the intervention recipient.

Limited receipt of support services among people with mild-to-moderate dementia: Findings from the IDEAL cohort.

BACKGROUND: Global initiatives that promote public health responses to dementia have resulted in numerous countries developing new national policies. Current policy guidelines in England, for example, recommend that people diagnosed with mild-to-moderate dementia receive information and psychosocial interventions to improve their ability to 'live well'. However, it remains unclear to what extent these recommendations are being achieved. METHODS: Self-reported information from 1537 people living with dementia and informant-reported information from 1277 carers of people living with dementia was used to quantify receipt of community-based dementia support services, including health and social care services provided by statutory or voluntary-sector organisations, in Britain from 2014 to 2016. Demographic factors associated with differences in receipt of support services were also investigated to identify particularly vulnerable groups of people living with dementia. RESULTS: Both self- and informant reports suggested that approximately 50% of people living with dementia received support services for dementia. Receipt of support services was lower among people living with dementia who are older, female, and have fewer educational qualifications. Receipt of support services also differed according to diagnosis and carer status, but was unrelated to marital status. CONCLUSIONS: Limited receipt of dementia support services among people living with dementia in Britain provides a baseline to assess the efficacy of current policy guidelines regarding provision of information and support. Targeted efforts to facilitate receipt of support services among the particularly vulnerable groups identified in the current study could improve the efficacy of dementia support services both in Britain and internationally, and should inform policy development.

European Academy of Neurology/European Alzheimer's Disease Consortium position statement on diagnostic disclosure, biomarker counseling, and management of patients with mild cognitive impairment.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Careful counseling through the diagnostic process and adequate postdiagnostic support in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is important. Previous studies have indicated heterogeneity in practice and the need for guidance for clinicians. METHODS: A joint European Academy of Neurology/European Alzheimer's Disease Consortium panel of dementia specialists was appointed. Through online meetings and emails, positions were developed regarding disclosing a syndrome diagnosis of MCI, pre- and postbiomarker sampling counseling, and postdiagnostic support. RESULTS: Prior to diagnostic evaluation, motives and wishes of the patient should be sought. Diagnostic disclosure should be carried out by a dementia specialist taking the ethical principles of "the right to know" versus "the wish not to know" into account. Disclosure should be accompanied by written information and a follow-up plan. It should be made clear that MCI is not dementia. Prebiomarker counseling should always be carried out if biomarker sampling is considered and postbiomarker counseling if sampling is carried out. A dementia specialist knowledgeable about biomarkers should inform about pros and cons, including alternatives, to enable an autonomous and informed decision. Postbiomarker counseling will depend in part on the results of biomarkers. Follow-up should be considered for all patients with MCI and include brain-healthy advice and possibly treatment for specific underlying causes. Advice on advance directives may be relevant. CONCLUSIONS: Guidance to clinicians on various aspects of the diagnostic process in patients with MCI is presented here as position statements. Further studies are needed to enable more evidence-based and standardized recommendations in the future.

Mild cognitive impairment: the Manchester consensus.

Given considerable variation in diagnostic and therapeutic practice, there is a need for national guidance on the use of neuroimaging, fluid biomarkers, cognitive testing, follow-up and diagnostic terminology in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). MCI is a heterogenous clinical syndrome reflecting a change in cognitive function and deficits on neuropsychological testing but relatively intact activities of daily living. MCI is a risk state for further cognitive and functional decline with 5-15% of people developing dementia per year. However, ~50% remain stable at 5 years and in a minority, symptoms resolve over time. There is considerable debate about whether MCI is a useful clinical diagnosis, or whether the use of the term prevents proper inquiry (by history, examination and investigations) into underlying causes of cognitive symptoms, which can include prodromal neurodegenerative disease, other physical or psychiatric illness, or combinations thereof. Cognitive testing, neuroimaging and fluid biomarkers can improve the sensitivity and specificity of aetiological diagnosis, with growing evidence that these may also help guide prognosis. Diagnostic criteria allow for a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease to be made where MCI is accompanied by appropriate biomarker changes, but in practice, such biomarkers are not available in routine clinical practice in the UK. This would change if disease-modifying therapies became available and required a definitive diagnosis but would present major challenges to the National Health Service and similar health systems. Significantly increased investment would be required in training, infrastructure and provision of fluid biomarkers and neuroimaging. Statistical techniques combining markers may provide greater sensitivity and specificity than any single disease marker but their practical usefulness will depend on large-scale studies to ensure ecological validity and that multiple measures, e.g. both cognitive tests and biomarkers, are widely available for clinical use. To perform such large studies, we must increase research participation amongst those with MCI.

Single Center Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting in Veterans with Prior Head and Neck Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients meeting criteria for intervention of carotid stenosis with a history of prior cervical radiation or neck dissection are considered "high risk" for carotid endarterectomy. This is a well-established indication for carotid artery stenting (CAS). The long-term outcomes of CAS in this population are less frequently published in the literature but are poor. The purpose of this study was to review long-term results of CAS in veteran patients with a prior history of treatment for head and/or neck cancer. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of a veteran patient population from 1998 to 2016. All patients at our institution with a prior history of treatment for head and/or neck cancer who underwent CAS were included in the analysis. During this time period, 44 patients met inclusion criteria and were treated with 57 carotid stenting interventions. The Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine survival and primary patency. The secondary aims were to analyze early outcomes and to identify predictive risk factors for mortality and reintervention. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 42.9 ± 36.6 months. The cumulative survival at 1, 5, and 10 years was 91%, 67%, and 48%, respectively. The primary patency at 1, 5, and 10 years was 95%, 86%, and 86%, respectively. The reintervention rate was 11% (n = 6) with an assisted primary patency rate of 100%. No neurologic events occurred within 30 days. There were 3 strokes in late follow-up and no stroke-related deaths. Eighteen patients (41%) died during the follow-up period, 15 of whom died during the first 5 years of follow-up. Ten (66%) of those patients died of recurrent or active index cancer. On univariate analysis, tumor, node, metastasis stage IV was significantly associated with death (P = 0.02). Multivariate models were not statistically significant for predicting mortality or reintervention CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the results in this series, CAS can be performed in these patients with low long-term rates of neurologic events and need for reintervention. However, the survival of patients with head and neck cancer undergoing CAS in this cohort is poor, which is consistent with other published series of patients undergoing CAS for head/neck cancer with at least 5-year follow-up. In this specific patient population, a more critical analysis of the patient's overall prognosis, especially as related to cancer, should be undertaken before offering CAS.

Factors associated with self- and informant ratings of quality of life, well-being and life satisfaction in people with mild-to-moderate dementia: results from the Improving the experience of Dementia and Enhancing Active Life programme.

BACKGROUND: a large number of studies have explored factors related to self- and informant ratings of quality of life in people with dementia, but many studies have had relatively small sample sizes and mainly focused on health conditions and dementia symptoms. The aim of this study is to compare self- and informant-rated quality of life, life satisfaction and well-being, and investigate the relationships of the two different rating methods with various social, psychological and health factors, using a large cohort study of community-dwelling people with dementia and carers in Great Britain. METHODS: this study included 1,283 dyads of people with mild-to-moderate dementia and their primary carers in the Improving the experience of Dementia and Enhancing Active Life study. Multivariate modelling was used to investigate associations of self- and informant-rated quality of life, life satisfaction and well-being with factors in five domains: psychological characteristics and health; social location; capitals, assets and resources; physical fitness and health; and managing everyday life with dementia. RESULTS: people with dementia rated their quality of life, life satisfaction and well-being more highly than did the informants. Despite these differences, the two approaches had similar relationships with social, psychological and physical health factors in the five domains. CONCLUSION: although self- and informant ratings differ, they display similar results when focusing on factors associated with quality of life, life satisfaction and well-being. Either self- or informant ratings may offer a reasonable source of information about people with dementia in terms of understanding associated factors.

Factors associated with long-term impact on informal caregivers during Alzheimer's disease dementia progression: 36-month results from GERAS.

OBJECTIVE: To identify, in caregivers of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia, factors associated with subjective (personal, physical, emotional, and social) and objective (informal caregiver time and costs) caregiver burden. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal European observational study: post-hoc analysis. SETTING: Clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling patients in France and Germany aged ≥ 55 years (n = 969) with probable AD and their informal caregivers. MEASUREMENTS: Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL), 12-item Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI-12), Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI), informal caregiver basic and instrumental ADL hours (Resource Utilization in Dementia instrument), and informal caregiver costs. Mixed-effect models of repeated measures (MMRM) were run, including baseline and time-dependent covariates (change from baseline [CFB] to 18 months in MMSE, ADCS-ADL, and NPI-12 scores) associated with CFB in ZBI score/informal caregiver time over 36 months (analyzed using linear regression models) and informal caregiver costs over 36 months (analyzed using generalized linear models). RESULTS: Greater decline in patient function (ADCS-ADL) over 18 months was associated with increased subjective caregiver burden (ZBI), hours, and costs over 36 months. Increased behavioral problems (NPI-12) over 18 months also negatively impacted ZBI. Cognitive decline (MMSE) over 18 months did not affect change in caregiver burden. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term informal caregiver burden was driven by worsening functional abilities and behavioral symptoms but not cognitive decline, over 18 months in community-dwelling patients with AD dementia. Identifying the drivers of caregiver burden could highlight areas in which interventions may benefit both caregivers and patients.

Psychological predictors of 'living well' with dementia: findings from the IDEAL study.

Objectives: Increasingly, research has explored how psychological resources enable adaptation to illness. However, it is unclear whether psychological resources protect against the potential negative effects on living well with a progressive and life-limiting condition such as dementia. This paper examines the association between psychological resources and the ability to 'live well' with dementia.Method: Data from 1547 people with mild-to-moderate dementia in the Improving the experience of Dementia and Enhancing Active Life (IDEAL) cohort were used. Multivariate linear regression was employed to examine the association between self-reported measures of psychological resources (self-efficacy, optimism and self-esteem) and indices of capability to 'live well' (quality of life, well-being and life satisfaction).Results: All three measures of psychological resources had positive and independent associations with indices of living well and the effect sizes were similar. Effect sizes reduced when accounting for shared variance between psychological resources, showing some overlap in these constructs.Conclusion: Self-efficacy, optimism and self-esteem were each associated with capability to 'live well'. Overlap between these three resources is evident and when combined they may provide greater resilience when dealing with the challenges of living with dementia. Interventions for people with dementia could seek to improve levels of these potentially-modifiable psychological resources.

A Comprehensive Model of Factors Associated With Capability to "Live Well" for Family Caregivers of People Living With Mild-to-Moderate Dementia: Findings From the IDEAL Study.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding key influences on outcomes for caregivers of people with dementia is hampered by inconsistent conceptualization and measurement of outcomes and limited evidence about the relative impact of different variables. We aimed to address these issues. METHODS: We analyzed data from 1283 caregivers of community-dwelling individuals with mild-to-moderate dementia in the Improving the experience of Dementia and Enhancing Active Life cohort study. We generated a "living well" latent factor from measures of quality of life, satisfaction with life, and well-being. We used structural equation modelling to derive latent variables for 7 domains reflecting caregivers' perceptions of their personal resources and experiences, and to examine the associations with caregivers' perceptions of their capability to "live well." RESULTS: The domain of psychological characteristics and psychological health was most strongly related to living well [2.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.08-2.97], followed by physical fitness and physical health (1.48; 95% CI, 1.04-1.91) and experiencing caregiving (1.34; 95% CI, 0.99-1.70). Social capitals, assets and resources (0.68; 95% CI, 0.35-1.00) and relationship with the person with dementia (-0.22; 95% CI, -0.41 to -0.03) had smaller, significant associations. Social location (0.28; 95% CI, -0.33 to 0.89) and managing everyday life with dementia (0.06; 95% CI, -0.15 to 0.28) were not significantly associated with living well. DISCUSSION: These findings demonstrate the importance of supporting caregivers' psychological and physical health and their ability to develop and maintain positive coping strategies, as well as enabling them to maintain vital social capitals, assets and resources.

A Comprehensive Model of Factors Associated With Subjective Perceptions of "Living Well" With Dementia: Findings From the IDEAL Study.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to better understand what predicts the capability to "live well" with dementia by identifying the relative contribution of life domains associated with the subjective experience of living well. METHODS: We analyzed data from 1547 individuals with mild-to-moderate dementia in the IDEAL cohort. We generated a "living well" latent factor from measures of quality of life, satisfaction with life, and well-being. We used multivariate modeling to identify variables related to living well measures and structural equation modeling to derive latent variables for 5 life domains and to examine the associations of these domains with living well. RESULTS: All 5 domains were individually associated with living well. When modeled together, the psychological characteristics and psychological health domain was the only independent predictor of living well [effect size, 3.55; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.93-4.17], and effect sizes were smaller for physical fitness and physical health (1.23, 95% CI: -0.10 to 2.58), social capitals, assets and resources (0.67; 95% CI: -0.04 to 1.38), managing everyday life with dementia (0.33; 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.71), and social location (0.08; 95% CI: -2.10 to 2.26). DISCUSSION: Psychological resources, and the social, environmental, and physical factors that underpin positive psychological states, are potentially important targets for interventions and initiatives that aim to improve the experience of living with dementia.

Individual goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation to improve everyday functioning for people with early-stage dementia: A multicentre randomised controlled trial (the GREAT trial).

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether individual goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation (CR) improves everyday functioning for people with mild-to-moderate dementia. DESIGN AND METHODS: Parallel group multicentre single-blind randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing CR added to usual treatment (CR) with usual treatment alone (TAU) for people with an ICD-10 diagnosis of Alzheimer, vascular or mixed dementia, and mild-to-moderate cognitive impairment (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score ≥ 18), and with a family member willing to contribute. Participants allocated to CR received 10 weekly sessions over 3 months and four maintenance sessions over 6 months. Participants were followed up 3 and 9 months post randomisation by blinded researchers. The primary outcome was self-reported goal attainment at 3 months. Secondary outcomes at 3 and 9 months included informant-reported goal attainment, quality of life, mood, self-efficacy, and cognition and study partner stress and quality of life. RESULTS: We randomised (1:1) 475 people with dementia; 445 (CR = 281) were included in the intention to treat analysis at 3 months and 426 (CR = 208) at 9 months. At 3 months, there were statistically significant large positive effects for participant-rated goal attainment (d = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.75-1.19), corroborated by informant ratings (d = 1.11; 95% CI, 0.89-1.34). These effects were maintained at 9 months for both participant (d = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.71-1.17) and informant (d = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.73-1.2) ratings. The observed gains related to goals directly targeted in the therapy. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: CR enables people with early-stage dementia to improve their everyday functioning in relation to individual goals targeted in the therapy.

The impact of co-morbidity on the quality of life of people with dementia: findings from the IDEAL study.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to investigate the co-morbidity profile of people with dementia and examine the associations between severity of co-morbidity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and quality of life (QoL). METHODS: The improving the experience of Dementia and Enhancing Active Life (IDEAL) cohort consisted of 1,547 people diagnosed with dementia who provided information on the number and type of co-morbid conditions. Participants also provided ratings of their health-related and dementia-specific QoL. RESULTS: The majority of the sample were living with more than one chronic condition. Hypertension was commonly reported and frequently combined with connective tissue disease, diabetes and depression. The number of co-morbid conditions was associated with low QoL scores, and those with severe co-morbidity (≥5 conditions) showed the greatest impact on their well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Co-morbidity is an important risk factor for poor QoL and health status in people with dementia. Greater recognition of the nature and impact of co-morbidity is needed to inform support and interventions for people with dementia and a multidisciplinary approach to care provision is recommended.

Potential cost savings to be made by slowing cognitive decline in mild Alzheimer's disease dementia using a model derived from the UK GERAS observational study.

BACKGROUND: Given the high costs associated with the care of those with Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia, we examined the likely impact of a reduction in the rate of cognitive decline upon cost outcomes associated with this disease. METHODS: Using the group of patients with mild AD dementia from the GERAS study, generalised linear modelling (GLM) was used to explore the relationship between change in cognition as measured using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and UK overall costs (health care and social care costs, and total societal costs) associated with AD dementia. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients with mild AD dementia were identified. Least squares mean (LSM) ± standard error (SE) reduction in MMSE score was 3.6 ± 0.4 points over 18 months. Using GLM it was possible to calculate that this worsening in cognition was associated with an 8.7% increase in total societal costs, equating to an increase of approximately £2200 per patient over an 18-month period. If the rate of decline in cognition was reduced by 30% or 50%, the associated savings in total societal costs over 18 months would be approximately £670 and £1100, respectively, of which only £110 and £180, respectively, could be attributed to a saving of health care costs. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that there are potential savings to be made in the care of patients with AD dementia through reducing the rate of cognitive decline. A reduction in wider societal costs is likely to be the main contributor to these potential savings, and need to be further evaluated when intervention costs and cost offsets can be measured.

Protocol for the IDEAL-2 longitudinal study: following the experiences of people with dementia and their primary carers to understand what contributes to living well with dementia and enhances active life.

BACKGROUND: There is a major need for longitudinal research examining the experiences of people with dementia and their primary carers, as relatively little is known about how the factors associated with capability to 'live well' vary over time. The main aim of the IDEAL-2 study is to investigate how and why, over time, people with dementia and their primary carers might vary in their capability to live well with dementia, whilst exploring both their use of health and care services and their unmet needs. METHODS: IDEAL-2 will build on the Improving the experience of Dementia and Enhancing Active Life (IDEAL) cohort of 1547 people (who, at recruitment between July 2014 and July 2016, had mild-to-moderate dementia), and their 1283 primary carers in Great Britain. The existing cohort will be enriched with additional participants with mild-to-moderate dementia (and their primary carers where available and willing) from the following groups: people with rarer forms of dementia, and/or those who are ≥90 years or < 65 years of age at time of recruitment. We will assess the primary outcome, capability to live well with dementia, and the factors influencing it using questionnaires at yearly intervals for 3 years. Additionally, we will seek to link the cohort data with administrative data to obtain information about health service use. Some participants will be invited for in-depth face-to-face interviews. The cohort study will be supplemented by linked research focusing on: the co-production of new measures of living well; including the perspectives of people with advanced dementia living in residential care settings; including people with dementia from black, Asian, and minority ethnic groups; and understanding the experience of people living with undiagnosed dementia. DISCUSSION: IDEAL-2 will provide evidence about the key indicators of, and factors associated with, living well over the course of dementia and how these differ for particular subgroups. It will tell us which combinations of services and support are most beneficial and cost-effective. Moreover, the IDEAL-2 study will gather evidence from under-researched groups of people with dementia, who are likely to have their own distinct perceptions of living well.

How useful is the EQ-5D in assessing the impact of caring for people with Alzheimer's disease?

BACKGROUND: The impact on informal caregivers of caring for people with Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia can be substantial, but it remains unclear which measures(s) best assess such impact. Our objective was to use data from the GERAS study to assess the ability of the EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) to measure the impact on caregivers of caring for people with AD dementia and to examine correlations between EQ-5D and caregiver burden. METHODS: GERAS was a prospective, non-interventional cohort study in community-dwelling patients with AD dementia and their informal caregivers. The EQ-5D and Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) were used to measure health-related quality of life and caregiver burden, respectively. Resource-use data collected included caregiver time spent with the patient on activities of daily living (ADL). Spearman correlations were computed between EQ-5D scores, ZBI scores, and time spent on instrumental ADL (T-IADL) at baseline, 18 months, and for 18-month change scores. T-IADL and ZBI change scores were summarized by EQ-5D domain change category (better/stable/worse). RESULTS: At baseline, 1495 caregivers had mean EQ-5D index scores of 0.86, 0.85, and 0.82, and ZBI total scores of 24.6, 29.4, and 34.1 for patients with mild, moderate, and moderately severe/severe AD dementia, respectively. Change in T-IADL showed a stronger correlation with change in ZBI (0.12; P < 0.001) than with change in EQ-5D index score (0.02; P = 0.546) although both correlations were very weak. Worsening within EQ-5D domains was associated with increases in ZBI scores, although 68%-90% of caregivers remained stable within each EQ-5D domain. There was no clear pattern for change in T-IADL by change in EQ-5D domain. CONCLUSIONS: EQ-5D may not be the optimum measure of the impact of caring for people with AD dementia due to its focus on physical health. Alternative measures need further investigation.

Current issues and future research priorities for health economic modelling across the full continuum of Alzheimer's disease.

Available data and models for the health-economic evaluation of treatment in Alzheimer's disease (AD) have limitations causing uncertainty to decision makers. Forthcoming treatment strategies in preclinical or early AD warrant an update on the challenges associated with their economic evaluation. The perspectives of the co-authors were complemented with a targeted review of literature discussing methodological issues and data gaps in AD health-economic modelling. The methods and data available to translate treatment efficacy in early disease into long-term outcomes of relevance to policy makers and payers are limited. Current long-term large-scale data accurately representing the continuous, multifaceted, and heterogeneous disease process are missing. The potential effect of disease-modifying treatment on key long-term outcomes such as institutionalization and death is uncertain but may have great effect on cost-effectiveness. Future research should give priority to collaborative efforts to access better data on the natural progression of AD and its association with key long-term outcomes.

How to deal with missing longitudinal data in cost of illness analysis in Alzheimer's disease-suggestions from the GERAS observational study.

BACKGROUND: Missing data are a common problem in prospective studies with a long follow-up, and the volume, pattern and reasons for missing data may be relevant when estimating the cost of illness. We aimed to evaluate the effects of different methods for dealing with missing longitudinal cost data and for costing caregiver time on total societal costs in Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: GERAS is an 18-month observational study of costs associated with AD. Total societal costs included patient health and social care costs, and caregiver health and informal care costs. Missing data were classified as missing completely at random (MCAR), missing at random (MAR) or missing not at random (MNAR). Simulation datasets were generated from baseline data with 10-40 % missing total cost data for each missing data mechanism. Datasets were also simulated to reflect the missing cost data pattern at 18 months using MAR and MNAR assumptions. Naïve and multiple imputation (MI) methods were applied to each dataset and results compared with complete GERAS 18-month cost data. Opportunity and replacement cost approaches were used for caregiver time, which was costed with and without supervision included and with time for working caregivers only being costed. RESULTS: Total costs were available for 99.4 % of 1497 patients at baseline. For MCAR datasets, naïve methods performed as well as MI methods. For MAR, MI methods performed better than naïve methods. All imputation approaches were poor for MNAR data. For all approaches, percentage bias increased with missing data volume. For datasets reflecting 18-month patterns, a combination of imputation methods provided more accurate cost estimates (e.g. bias: -1 % vs -6 % for single MI method), although different approaches to costing caregiver time had a greater impact on estimated costs (29-43 % increase over base case estimate). CONCLUSIONS: Methods used to impute missing cost data in AD will impact on accuracy of cost estimates although varying approaches to costing informal caregiver time has the greatest impact on total costs. Tailoring imputation methods to the reason for missing data will further our understanding of the best analytical approach for studies involving cost outcomes.