Correction to: Cross-cultural validation of the motivation to change lifestyle and health behaviours for dementia risk reduction scale in the Dutch general population.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Cross-cultural validation of the motivation to change lifestyle and health behaviours for dementia risk reduction scale in the Dutch general population.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to translate and validate the Motivation to Change Lifestyle and Health Behaviours for Dementia Risk Reduction (MCLHB-DRR) scale in the Dutch general population. METHODS: A random sample of Dutch residents aged between 30 and 80 years old were invited to complete an online questionnaire including the translated MCLHB-DRR scale. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA) were conducted to assess construct validity. Cronbach's alpha was calculated to assess internal consistency. RESULTS: Six hundred eighteen participants completed the questionnaire. EFA and Cronbach's alpha showed that four items were candidate for deletion. CFA confirmed that deleting these items led to an excellent fit (RMSEA = 0.043, CFI = 0.960, TLI = 0.951, χ2/df = 2.130). Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.69 to 0.93, indicating good internal consistency. CONCLUSION: The current study demonstrated that the Dutch MCLHB-DRR scale is a valid scale for assessing health beliefs and attitudes towards dementia risk reduction among Dutch adults aged between 30 and 80 years old.

Implementation barriers and facilitators for referral from the hospital to community-based lifestyle interventions from the perspective of lifestyle professionals: A qualitative study.

PURPOSE: A lifestyle front office (LFO) in the hospital is a not yet existing, novel concept that can refer patients under treatment in the hospital to community-based lifestyle interventions (CBLI). The aim of this study was to identify implementation barriers and facilitators regarding the implementation of an LFO in the hospital from the perspective of CBLI-professionals and to develop evidence-based implementation strategies to reduce these identified barriers. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews until data saturation, with 23 lifestyle professionals working in the community. A semi-structured topic guide was used, inquiring about (1) community-based lifestyle interventions; (2) their views about referral from the LFO; and (3) their preferences, needs and recommendations for collaboration with the LFO in the hospital. The online interviews lasted on average 46 minutes, were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic content analysis was conducted. Found barriers and facilitators regarding the LFO where mapped using the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) whereafter evidence based strategies were developed using the CFIR-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change Strategy Matching Tool V.1.0 (CFIR-ERIC). RESULTS: Barriers and facilitators were divided into two main themes: 1) barriers and facilitators related to the referral from LFO to CBLI (i.e. financial, cultural, geographical, quality) and 2) barriers and facilitators related to the collaboration between LFO and CBLI (i.e. referral, communication platform and partnership). Thirty-seven implementation strategies concerning 15 barriers were developed and clustered into six overarching strategies: identify referral options, determine qualifications lifestyle professionals, develop support tools, build networks, facilitate learning collaboratives, and optimize workflow. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, barriers and facilitators for the development of the LFO were found and matching implementation strategies were developed. Practical improvements, like identifying specific referral options or develop support tools, can be implemented immediately. The implementation of other strategies, like connecting care pathways in basic services, primary, secondary and tertiary care, will take more time and effort to come to full potential. Future research should evaluate all implemented strategies.

LOFIT (Lifestyle front Office For Integrating lifestyle medicine in the Treatment of patients): a novel care model towards community-based options for lifestyle change-study protocol.

BACKGROUND: A healthy lifestyle is indispensable for the prevention of noncommunicable diseases. However, lifestyle medicine is hampered by time constraints and competing priorities of treating physicians. A dedicated lifestyle front office (LFO) in secondary/tertiary care may provide an important contribution to optimize patient-centred lifestyle care and connect to lifestyle initiatives from the community. The LOFIT study aims to gain insight into the (cost-)effectiveness of the LFO. METHODS: Two parallel pragmatic randomized controlled trials will be conducted for (cardio)vascular disorders (i.e. (at risk of) (cardio)vascular disease, diabetes) and musculoskeletal disorders (i.e. osteoarthritis, hip or knee prosthesis). Patients from three outpatient clinics in the Netherlands will be invited to participate in the study. Inclusion criteria are body mass index (BMI) ≥25 (kg/m2) and/or smoking. Participants will be randomly allocated to either the intervention group or a usual care control group. In total, we aim to include 552 patients, 276 in each trial divided over both treatment arms. Patients allocated to the intervention group will participate in a face-to-face motivational interviewing (MI) coaching session with a so-called lifestyle broker. The patient will be supported and guided towards suitable community-based lifestyle initiatives. A network communication platform will be used to communicate between the lifestyle broker, patient, referred community-based lifestyle initiative and/or other relevant stakeholders (e.g. general practitioner). The primary outcome measure is the adapted Fuster-BEWAT, a composite health risk and lifestyle score consisting of resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure, objectively measured physical activity and sitting time, BMI, fruit and vegetable consumption and smoking behaviour. Secondary outcomes include cardiometabolic markers, anthropometrics, health behaviours, psychological factors, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), cost-effectiveness measures and a mixed-method process evaluation. Data collection will be conducted at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months follow-up. DISCUSSION: This study will gain insight into the (cost-)effectiveness of a novel care model in which patients under treatment in secondary or tertiary care are referred to community-based lifestyle initiatives to change their lifestyle. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN ISRCTN13046877 . Registered 21 April 2022.

Association between dementia parental family history and mid-life modifiable risk factors for dementia: a cross-sectional study using propensity score matching within the Lifelines cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Individuals with a parental family history (PFH) of dementia have an increased risk to develop dementia, regardless of genetic risks. The aim of this study is to investigate the association between a PFH of dementia and currently known modifiable risk factors for dementia among middle-aged individuals using propensity score matching (PSM). DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A subsample of Lifelines (35-65 years), a prospective population-based cohort study in the Netherlands was used. OUTCOME MEASURES: Fourteen modifiable risk factors for dementia and the overall Lifestyle for Brain Health (LIBRA) score, indicating someone's potential for dementia risk reduction (DRR). RESULTS: The study population included 89 869 participants of which 10 940 (12.2%) had a PFH of dementia (mean (SD) age=52.95 (7.2)) and 36 389 (40.5%) without a PFH of dementia (mean (SD) age=43.19 (5.5)). Of 42 540 participants (47.3%), PFH of dementia was imputed. After PSM, potential confounding variables were balanced between individuals with and without PFH of dementia. Individuals with a PFH of dementia had more often hypertension (OR=1.19; 95% CI 1.14 to 1.24), high cholesterol (OR=1.24; 95% CI 1.18 to 1.30), diabetes (OR=1.26; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.42), cardiovascular diseases (OR=1.49; 95% CI 1.18 to 1.88), depression (OR=1.23; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.41), obesity (OR=1.14; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.20) and overweight (OR=1.10; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.17), and were more often current smokers (OR=1.20; 95% CI 1.14 to 1.27) and ex-smokers (OR=1.21; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.27). However, they were less often low/moderate alcohol consumers (OR=0.87; 95% CI 0.83 to 0.91), excessive alcohol consumers (OR=0.93; 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98), socially inactive (OR=0.84; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.90) and physically inactive (OR=0.93; 95% CI 0.91 to 0.97). Having a PFH of dementia resulted in a higher LIBRA score (RC=0.15; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.19). CONCLUSION: We found that having a PFH of dementia was associated with several modifiable risk factors. This suggests that middle-aged individuals with a PFH of dementia are a group at risk and could benefit from DRR. Further research should explore their knowledge, beliefs and attitudes towards DRR, and whether they are willing to assess their risk and change their lifestyle to reduce dementia risk.

Uptake and effectiveness of a tailor-made online lifestyle programme targeting modifiable risk factors for dementia among middle-aged descendants of people with recently diagnosed dementia: study protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial (Demin study).

INTRODUCTION: Descendants of patients with dementia have a higher risk to develop dementia. This study aims to investigate the uptake and effectiveness of an online tailor-made lifestyle programme for dementia risk reduction (DRR) among middle-aged descendants of people with recently diagnosed late-onset dementia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Demin is a cluster randomised controlled trial, aiming to include 21 memory clinics of which 13 will be randomly allocated to the passive (poster and flyer in a waiting room) and 8 to the active recruitment strategy (additional personal invitation by members of the team of the memory clinic). We aim to recruit 378 participants (40-60 years) with a parent who is recently diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease or vascular dementia at one of the participating memory clinics. All participants receive a dementia risk assessment (online questionnaire, physical examination and blood sample) and subsequently an online tailor-made lifestyle advice regarding protective (Mediterranean diet, low/moderate alcohol consumption and high cognitive activity) and risk factors (physical inactivity, smoking, loneliness, cardiovascular diseases (CVD), hypertension, high cholesterol, diabetes, obesity, renal dysfunction and depression) for dementia. The primary outcome is the difference in uptake between the two recruitment strategies. Secondary outcomes are change(s) in (1) the Lifestyle for Brain Health score, (2) individual health behaviours, (3) health beliefs and attitudes towards DRR and (4) compliance to the tailor-made lifestyle advice. Outcomes will be measured at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after baseline. The effectiveness of this online tailor-made lifestyle programme will be evaluated by comparing Demin participants to a matched control group (lifelines cohort). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport according to the Population Screening Act. All participants have to give online informed consent using SMS-tan (transaction authentication number delivered via text message). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and (inter)national conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR7434.