Natriuretic Peptides to Classify Risk of Atrial Fibrillation Detection After Stroke: Analysis of the BIOSIGNAL and PRECISE Cohort Studies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Prolonged cardiac monitoring (PCM) increases atrial fibrillation (AF) detection after ischemic stroke, but access is limited, and it is burdensome for patients. Our objective was to assess whether midregional proatrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) could classify people who are unlikely to have AF after ischemic stroke and allow better targeting of PCM. METHODS: We analyzed people from the Biomarker Signature of Stroke Aetiology (BIOSIGNAL) study with ischemic stroke, no known AF, and ≥3 days cardiac monitoring. External validation was performed in the Preventing Recurrent Cardioembolic Stroke: Right Approach, Right Patient (PRECISE) study of 28 days of cardiac monitoring in people with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack and no known AF. The main outcome is no AF detection. We assessed the discriminatory value of MR-proANP and NT-proBNP combined with clinical variables to identify people with no AF. A decision curve analysis was performed with combined data to determine the net reduction in people who would undergo PCM using the models based on a 15% threshold probability for AF detection. RESULTS: We included 621 people from the BIOSIGNAL study. The clinical multivariable prediction model included age, NIH Stroke Scale score, lipid-lowering therapy, creatinine, and smoking status. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for clinical variables was 0.68 (95% CI 0.62-0.74), which improved with the addition of log10MR-proANP (0.72, 0.66-0.78; p = 0.001) or log10NT-proBNP (0.71, 0.65-0.77; p = 0.009). Performance was similar for the models with log10MR-proANP vs log10NT-proBNP (p = 0.28). In 239 people from the PRECISE study, the AUROC for clinical variables was 0.68 (0.59-0.76), which improved with the addition of log10NT-proBNP (0.73, 0.65-0.82; p < 0.001) or log10MR-proANP (0.79, 0.72-0.86; p < 0.001). Performance was better for the model with log10MR-proANP vs log10NT-proBNP (p = 0.03). The models could reduce the number of people who would undergo PCM by 30% (clinical and log10MR-proANP), 27% (clinical and log10NT-proBNP), or 20% (clinical only). DISCUSSION: MR-proANP and NT-proBNP help classify people who are unlikely to have AF after ischemic stroke. Measuring MR-proANP or NT-proBNP could reduce the number of people who need PCM by 30%, without reducing the amount of AF detected. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: NCT02274727; clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02274727.

Comparing Research Priority-Setting Partnerships for Older Adults Across International Health Care Systems: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Priority setting partnerships (PSPs) attempt to shape the research agenda to address the needs of local populations of interest. We reviewed the PSPs for older adults, with a focus on exemplar health care systems: United Kingdom (UK; publicly funded), United States (private health insurance-based), South Korea (national health insurance-based), and Africa (out-of-pocket). DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We searched databases and sources (January 2011-October 202l; updated in February 2023) for PSPs of older adults' health care. METHODS: Based on the British geriatric medicine curriculum, we extracted and categorized the PSP topics by areas and the research priorities by themes, and generated evidence maps depicting and comparing the research gaps across the systems. We evaluated PSP quality using the Nine Common Themes of Good Clinical Practice. RESULTS: We included 32 PSPs (United Kingdom: n = 25; United States: n = 7; South Korea and Africa: n = 0) and identified priorities regarding 27 conditions or service arrangements in the United Kingdom and 9 in the United States (predominantly in neurology/psychiatry). The UK priorities focused on treatments and interventions whereas the US on prognostic/predictive factors. There were notable research gaps within the existing PSPs, including common geriatric conditions like continence and frailty. The PSP quality evaluation revealed issues around lacking inclusion of ethnic minorities. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Research priorities for older adult health care vary internationally, but certain health care systems/countries have no available PSPs. Where PSPs are available, fundamental aspects of geriatric medicine have not been included. Future researchers should conduct prioritizations in different countries, focus on core geriatric syndromes, and ensure the inclusion of all relevant stakeholder groups.

Association Between the AHA Life's Essential 8 Score and Incident All-Cause Dementia: A Prospective Cohort Study from UK Biobank.

This study aimed to investigate the association between the Life's Essential 8 (LE8) score and incident all-cause dementia (including Alzheimer's disease [AD] and vascular dementia) in UK Biobank. A total of 259,718 participants were included in this prospective study. Smoking, non-HDL cholesterol, blood pressure, body mass index, HbA1c, physical activity, diet, and sleep were used to create the Life's Essential 8 (LE8) score. Associations between the score (both continuous and as quartiles) and outcomes were investigated using adjusted Cox proportional hazard models. The potential impact fractions of 2 scenarios and the rate advancement periods were also calculated. Over a median follow-up of 10.6 years, 4958 participants were diagnosed with any dementia. Higher LE8 scores were associated with lower risk of all-cause and vascular dementia in an exponential decay pattern. Compared with individuals in the healthiest quartile, those in the least healthy quartile had a higher risk of all-cause dementia (HR: 1.50 [95% CI: 1.37-1.65] and vascular dementia (HR: 1.86 [1.44-2.42]). A targeted intervention that increased the score by 10-points among individuals in the lowest quartile could have prevented 6.8% of all-cause dementia cases. Individuals in the least healthy LE8 quartile might develop all-cause dementia 2.45 years earlier than their counterparts. In conclusion, individuals with higher LE8 scores had lower risk of all-cause and vascular dementia. Because of nonlinear associations, interventions targeted at the least healthy individuals might produce greater population-level benefits.

Understanding Pathways into Care homes using Data (UnPiCD study): a retrospective cohort study using national linked health and social care data.

BACKGROUND: Pathways into care are poorly understood but important life events for individuals and their families. UK policy is to avoid moving-in to care homes from acute hospital settings. This assumes that moves from secondary care represent a system failure. However, those moving to care homes from community and hospital settings may be fundamentally different groups, each requiring differing care approaches. OBJECTIVE: To characterise individuals who move-in to a care home from hospital and compare with those moving-in from the community. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective cohort study using cross-sectoral data linkage of care home data. METHODS: We included adults moving-in to care homes between 1/4/13 and 31/3/16, recorded in the Scottish Care Home Census. Care home data were linked to general and psychiatric hospital admissions, community prescribing and mortality records to ascertain comorbidities, significant diagnoses, hospital resource use, polypharmacy and frailty. Multivariate logistic regression identified predictors of moving-in from hospital compared to from community. RESULTS: We included 23,892 individuals moving-in to a care home, 13,564 (56.8%) from hospital and 10,328 (43.2%) from the community. High frailty risk adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 5.11 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 4.60-5.68), hospital discharge with diagnosis of fracture aOR 3.91 (95%CI: 3.41-4.47) or stroke aOR 8.42 (95%CI: 6.90-10.29) were associated with moving-in from hospital. Discharge from in-patient psychiatry was also a highly significant predictor aOR 19.12 (95%CI: 16.26-22.48). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals moving-in to care homes directly from hospital are clinically distinct from those from the community. Linkage of cross-sectoral data can allow exploration of pathways into care at scale.

Handgrip strength and all-cause dementia incidence and mortality: findings from the UK Biobank prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the associations of grip strength with incidence and mortality from dementia and whether these associations differ by sociodemographic and lifestyle factors. METHODS: A total of 466 788 participants of the UK Biobank (median age 56.5 years, 54.5% women). The outcome was all-cause dementia incidence and mortality and the exposure was grip strength. Grip strength was assessed using a Jamar J00105 hydraulic hand dynamometer. RESULTS: Excluding the first 2 years of follow-up (landmark analysis), mean follow-up was 9.1 years (inter-quartile range: 8.3; 9.7) for incidence and 9.3 (inter-quartile range: 8.7; 10.0) for mortality. During this time, 4087 participants developed dementia, and 1309 died from it. Lower grip strength was associated with a higher risk of dementia incidence and mortality independent of major confounding factors (P < 0.001). Individuals in the lowest quintile of grip strength had 72% [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.55; 1.92] higher incident dementia risk and 87% [95% CI: 1.55; 2.26] higher risk of dementia mortality compared with those in the highest quintile. Our PAF analyses indicate that 30.1% of dementia cases and 32.3% of dementia deaths are attributable to having low grip strength. The association between grip strength and dementia outcomes did not differ by lifestyle or sociodemographic factors. CONCLUSIONS: Lower grip strength was associated with a higher risk of all-cause dementia incidence and mortality, independently of important confounding factors.

Multiple house occupancy is associated with mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries mandated staying at home to reduce transmission. This study examined the association between living arrangements (house occupancy numbers) and outcomes in COVID-19. METHODS: Study population was drawn from the COPE study, a multicentre cohort study. House occupancy was defined as: living alone; living with one other person; living with multiple other people; or living in a nursing/residential home. Outcomes were time from admission to mortality and discharge (Cox regression), and Day 28 mortality (logistic regression) analyses were adjusted for key comorbidities and covariates including admission: age, sex, smoking, heart failure, admission C-reactive protein (CRP), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, estimated glomerular filtration rate, frailty and others. RESULTS: A total of 1584 patients were included from 13 hospitals across UK and Italy: 676 (42.7%) were female, 907 (57.3%) were male, median age was 74 years (range: 19-101). At 28 days, 502 (31.7%) had died. Median admission CRP was 67, 82, 79.5 and 83 mg/l for those living alone, with someone else, in a house of multiple occupancy and in a nursing/residential home, respectively. Compared to living alone, living with anyone was associated with increased mortality: within a couple [adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) = 1.39, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.09-1.77, P = 0.007]; living in a house of multiple occupancy (aHR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.17-2.38, P = 0.005); and living in a residential home (aHR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.03-1.80, P = 0.031). CONCLUSION: For patients hospitalized with COVID-19, those living with one or more people had an increased association with mortality, they also exhibited higher CRP indicating increased disease severity suggesting they delayed seeking care.

Understanding Stakeholder Views Regarding the Design of an Intervention Trial to Reduce Anticholinergic Burden: A Qualitative Study.

Background: Anticholinergic burden (ACB), is defined as the cumulative effect of anticholinergic medication which are widely prescribed to older adults despite increasing ACB being associated with adverse effects such as: falls, dementia and increased mortality. This research explores the views of health care professionals (HCPs) and patients on a planned trial to reduce ACB by stopping or switching anticholinergic medications. The objectives were to explore the views of key stakeholders (patients, the public, and HCPs) regarding the potential acceptability, design and conduct of an ACB reduction trial. Materials and Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews and focus groups with 25 HCPs involved in prescribing medication with anticholinergic properties and with 22 members of the public and patients who were prescribed with the medication. Topic guides for the interviews and focus groups explored aspects of feasibility including: 1) views of a trial of de-prescribing/medication switching; 2) how to best communicate information about such a trial; 3) views on who would be best placed and preferred to undertake such medication changes, e.g., pharmacists or General Practitioners (GPs)? 4) perceived barriers and facilitators to trial participation and the smooth conduct of such a trial; 5) HCP views on the future implementability of this approach to reducing ACB and 6) patients' willingness to be contacted for participation in a future trial. Qualitative data analysis was underpinned by Normalization Process Theory. Results: The public, patients and HCPs were supportive of an ACB reduction trial. There was consensus among the different groups that key points to consider with such a trial included: 1) ensuring patient engagement throughout to enable concerns/potential pitfalls to be addressed from the beginning; 2) ensuring clear communication to minimise potential misconceptions about the reasons for ACB reduction; and 3) provision of access to a point of contact for patients throughout the life of a trial to address concerns; The HCPs in particular suggested two more key points: 4) minimise the workload implications of any trial; and 5) pharmacists may be best placed to carry out ACB reviews, though overall responsibility for patient medication should remain with GPs. Conclusion: Patients, the public and HCPs are supportive of trials to reduce ACB. Good communication and patient engagement during design and delivery of a trial are essential as well as safety netting and minimising workload.

Assessing Risks of Polypharmacy Involving Medications With Anticholinergic Properties.

PURPOSE: Anticholinergic burden (ACB), the cumulative effect of anticholinergic medications, is associated with adverse outcomes in older people but is less studied in middle-aged populations. Numerous scales exist to quantify ACB. The aims of this study were to quantify ACB in a large cohort using the 10 most common anticholinergic scales, to assess the association of each scale with adverse outcomes, and to assess overlap in populations identified by each scale. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal analysis of the UK Biobank community cohort (502,538 participants, baseline age: 37-73 years, median years of follow-up: 6.2). The ACB was calculated at baseline using 10 scales. Baseline data were linked to national mortality register records and hospital episode statistics. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, MACE, hospital admission for fall/fracture, and hospital admission with dementia/delirium. Cox proportional hazards models (hazard ratio [HR], 95% CI) quantified associations between ACB scales and outcomes adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic status, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol use, physical activity, and morbidity count. RESULTS: Anticholinergic medication use varied from 8% to 17.6% depending on the scale used. For the primary outcome, ACB was significantly associated with all-cause mortality/MACE for each scale. The Anticholinergic Drug Scale was most strongly associated with mortality/MACE (HR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.11-1.14 per 1-point increase in score). The ACB was significantly associated with all secondary outcomes. The Anticholinergic Effect on Cognition scale was most strongly associated with dementia/delirium (HR = 1.45; 95% CI, 1.3-1.61 per 1-point increase). CONCLUSIONS: The ACB was associated with adverse outcomes in a middle- to older-aged population. Populations identified and effect size differed between scales. Scale choice influenced the population identified as potentially requiring reduction in ACB in clinical practice or intervention trials.

Evaluation of delirium screening tools in geriatric medical inpatients: a diagnostic test accuracy study.

INTRODUCTION: screening all unscheduled older adults for delirium is recommended in national guidelines, but there is no consensus on how to perform initial assessment. AIM: to evaluate the test accuracy of five brief cognitive assessment tools for delirium diagnosis in routine clinical practice. METHODS: a consecutive cohort of non-elective, elderly care (older than 65 years) hospital inpatients admitted to a geriatric medical assessment unit of an urban teaching hospital. Reference assessments were clinical diagnosis of delirium performed by elderly care physicians. Routine screening tests were: Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT-10, AMT-4), 4 A's Test (4AT), brief Confusion Assessment Method (bCAM), months of the year backwards (MOTYB) and informant Single Question in Delirium (SQiD). RESULTS: we assessed 500 patients, mean age 83 years (range = 66-101). Clinical diagnoses were: 93 of 500 (18.6%) definite delirium, 104 of 500 (20.8%) possible delirium and 277 of 500 (55.4%) no delirium; 266 of 500 (53.2%) were identified as definite or possible dementia. For diagnosis of definite delirium, AMT-4 (cut-point < 3/4) had a sensitivity of 92.7% (95% confidence interval (CI): 84.8-97.3), with a specificity of 53.7% (95% CI: 48.1-59.2); AMT-10 (<4/10), MOTYB (<4/12) and SQiD showed similar performance. bCAM had a sensitivity of 70.3% (95% CI: 58.5-80.3) with a specificity of 91.4% (95% CI: 87.7-94.3). 4AT (>4/12) had a sensitivity of 86.7% (95% CI: 77.5-93.2) and specificity of 69.5% (95% CI: 64.4-74.3). CONCLUSIONS: short screening tools such as AMT-4 or MOTYB have good sensitivity for definite delirium, but poor specificity; these tools may be reasonable as a first stage in assessment for delirium. The 4AT is feasible and appears to perform well with good sensitivity and reasonable specificity.

Test Accuracy of Informant-Based Cognitive Screening Tests for Diagnosis of Dementia and Multidomain Cognitive Impairment in Stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Poststroke cognitive assessment can be performed using standardized questionnaires designed for family or care givers. We sought to describe the test accuracy of such informant-based assessments for diagnosis of dementia/multidomain cognitive impairment in stroke. METHODS: We performed a systematic review using a sensitive search strategy across multidisciplinary electronic databases. We created summary test accuracy metrics and described reporting and quality using STARDdem and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) tools, respectively. RESULTS: From 1432 titles, we included 11 studies. Ten papers used the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE). Four studies described IQCODE for diagnosis of poststroke dementia (n=1197); summary sensitivity: 0.81 (95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.93); summary specificty: 0.83 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.93). Five studies described IQCODE as tool for predicting future dementia (n=837); summary sensitivity: 0.60 (95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.83); summary specificity: 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.00). All papers had issues with at least 1 aspect of study reporting or quality. CONCLUSIONS: There is a limited literature on informant cognitive assessments in stroke. IQCODE as a diagnostic tool has test properties similar to other screening tools, IQCODE as a prognostic tool is specific but insensitive. We found no papers describing test accuracy of informant tests for diagnosis of prestroke cognitive decline, few papers on poststroke dementia and all included papers had issues with potential bias.

Association between cognition and gene polymorphisms involved in thrombosis and haemostasis.

An association between blood markers of thrombosis and haemostasis and cognitive decline has been described. These results may be confounded by lifestyle and environmental factors. We used a Mendelian randomisation approach to describe the association between thrombosis/haemostasis genotypes and cognition. We studied the genetic variants (single nucleotide polymorphisms) of circulating markers of thrombosis and haemostasis. Our chosen blood factors and associated polymorphisms were D-dimer [rs12029080], fibrinogen [rs1800789], plasminogen activator inhibitor [rs2227631], and von Willebrand factor [rs1063857]. We described association with multidomain cognitive test scores using data from the Scottish Family Health Study. Cognitive data were analysed for individual tests and combined to give a general cognitive factor. In 20,288 subjects, we found no evidence of association between cognitive function (individual tests and combined scores) and any of the above-mentioned single nucleotide polymorphisms. Lower scores on cognitive measures were associated with increasing age, socioeconomic deprivation, blood pressure, waist-hip ratio, smoking, and vascular comorbidity (all p < 0.001). In a post hoc sensitivity analysis restricted to those aged over 50 years, there was still no signal of association. Our data add to our understanding of determinants of cognition but are not definitive; the variation in blood levels explained by SNPs was modest and our sample size may have been insufficient to detect a modest association.