A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study Investigating General Practitioner Clinical Impression and Brief Cognitive Assessments for Dementia in Primary Care, Compared to Specialized Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Many health systems are interested in increasing the number of uncomplicated and typical dementia diagnoses that are made in primary care, but the comparative accuracy of tests is unknown. OBJECTIVE: Calculate diagnostic accuracy of brief cognitive tests in primary care. METHODS: We did a diagnostic test accuracy study in general practice, in people over 70 years who had consulted their GP with cognitive symptoms but had no prior diagnosis of dementia. The reference standard was specialist assessment, adjudicated for difficult cases, according to ICD-10. We assessed 16 index tests at a research clinic, and additionally analyzed referring GPs clinical judgement. RESULTS: 240 participants had a median age of 80 years, of whom 126 were men and 132 had dementia. Sensitivity of individual tests at the recommended thresholds ranged from 56% for GP judgement (specificity 89%) to 100% for MoCA (specificity 16%). Specificity of individual tests ranged from 4% for Sniffin' sticks (sensitivity 100%) to 91% for Timed Up and Go (sensitivity 23%). The 95% centile of test duration in people with dementia ranged from 3 minutes for 6CIT and Time and Change, to 16 minutes for MoCA. Combining tests with GP judgement increased test specificity and decreased sensitivity: e.g., MoCA with GP Judgement had specificity 87% and sensitivity 55%. CONCLUSIONS: Using GP judgement to inform selection of tests was an efficient strategy. Using IQCODE in people who GPs judge as having dementia and 6CIT in people who GPs judge as having no dementia, would be a time-efficient and accurate diagnostic assessment.The original protocol for the study is available at https://bmcfampract.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12875-016-0475-2.

Goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation for early-stage Alzheimer's and related dementias: the GREAT RCT.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive rehabilitation (CR) is an individualised, person-centred intervention for people with mild to moderate dementia that addresses the impact of cognitive impairment on everyday functioning. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether or not CR is a clinically effective and cost-effective intervention for people with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease or vascular or mixed dementia, and their carers. DESIGN: This multicentre randomised controlled trial compared CR with treatment as usual (TAU). Following a baseline assessment and goal-setting to identify areas of everyday functioning that could be improved or better managed, participants were randomised (1 : 1) via secure web access to an independent randomisation centre to receive either TAU or CR and followed up at 3 and 9 months post randomisation. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Participants had an International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Edition, diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease or vascular or mixed dementia, had mild to moderate cognitive impairment (Mini Mental State Examination score of ≥ 18 points), were stable on medication if prescribed, and had a family carer who was willing to contribute. The exclusion criteria were people with a history of brain injury or other neurological disorder and an inability to speak English. To achieve adequate power, we needed 350 people to complete the trial, with 175 people in each trial arm. INTERVENTION: Cognitive rehabilitation consisted of 10 therapy sessions over 3 months, followed by four maintenance sessions over 6 months, delivered in participants' homes. The therapists were nine occupational therapists and one nurse. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was self-reported goal attainment at 3 months. Goal attainment was also assessed at 9 months. Carers provided independent ratings of goal attainment at both time points. The secondary outcomes were participant quality of life, mood, self-efficacy and cognition, and carer stress, health status and quality of life. The assessments at 3 and 9 months were conducted by researchers who were blind to the participants' group allocation. RESULTS: A total of 475 participants were randomised (CR arm, n = 239; TAU arm, n = 236), 427 participants (90%) completed the trial and 426 participants were analysed (CR arm, n = 208, TAU arm, n = 218). At 3 months, there were statistically significant large positive effects for participant-rated goal attainment [mean change in the CR arm: 2.57; mean change in the TAU arm: 0.86; Cohen'sd = 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 1.19], corroborated by carer ratings (Cohen'sd = 1.11, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.34). These effects were maintained at 9 months for both the participant ratings (Cohen's d = 0.94, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.17) and the carer ratings (Cohen's d = 0.96, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.20). There were no significant differences in the secondary outcomes. In the cost-utility analyses, there was no evidence of cost-effectiveness in terms of gains in the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of the person with dementia (measured using the DEMentia Quality Of Life questionnaire utility score) or the QALYs of the carer (measured using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, three-level version) from either cost perspective. In the cost-effectiveness analyses, by reference to the primary outcome of participant-rated goal attainment, CR was cost-effective from both the health and social care perspective and the societal perspective at willingness-to-pay values of £2500 and above for improvement in the goal attainment measure. There was no evidence on the cost-effectiveness of the self-efficacy measure (the Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale) from either cost perspective. LIMITATIONS: Possible limitations arose from the non-feasibility of using observational outcome measures, the lack of a general measure of functional ability and the exclusion of people without a carer or with rarer forms of dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive rehabilitation is clinically effective in enabling people with early-stage dementia to improve their everyday functioning in relation to individual goals targeted in the therapy sessions. FUTURE WORK: Next steps will focus on the implementation of CR into NHS and social care services and on extending the approach to people with rarer forms of dementia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN21027481. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive rehabilitation (CR) is a personalised intervention to help people with early-stage dementia to manage everyday activities. This individualised therapy is conducted in people's own homes over several sessions. A therapist works with the person and the carer to identify realistic and relevant goals, plan how to tackle these and support people in achieving them. Previous small studies suggested that CR could be beneficial. METHODS: The Goal-oriented cognitive Rehabilitation in Early-stage Alzheimer's and related dementias: multicentre single-blind randomised controlled Trial (GREAT) was run in eight centres to find out whether or not CR improves everyday functioning. Participants were in the early stages of having Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia or mixed dementia, with a family carer involved. At the first assessment, participants identified areas in which they would like to see improvements, and set goals. Participants and carers rated how well participants were currently doing in relation to these goals and completed questionnaires, for example about mood and quality of life. Participants were then randomly selected to either receive CR or continue with treatment as usual (TAU). CR consisted of 10 weekly sessions with the therapist over 3 months, followed by four sessions over the next 6 months. Participants were reassessed after 3 and 9 months. RESULTS: We included 475 participants, and 427 participants (90%) completed the trial (209 participants in the CR arm and 218 participants in the TAU arm). After 3 months, the ratings by both participants and carers in the CR group showed that participants were doing significantly better in relation to their goals, and this was maintained 6 months later. Ratings for the TAU-arm participants did not improve significantly. There were no other differences between the groups. There was a strong economic case for CR. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive rehabilitation is effective in enabling people with early-stage dementia to improve their everyday functioning in relation to individual goals targeted in the therapy sessions. Next steps will focus on the implementation of CR into NHS and social care services.

Managing diabetes in people with dementia: a realist review.

BACKGROUND: Dementia and diabetes mellitus are common long-term conditions that coexist in a large number of older people. People living with dementia and diabetes may be at increased risk of complications such as hypoglycaemic episodes because they are less able to manage their diabetes. OBJECTIVES: To identify the key features or mechanisms of programmes that aim to improve the management of diabetes in people with dementia and to identify areas needing further research. DESIGN: Realist review, using an iterative, stakeholder-driven, four-stage approach. This involved scoping the literature and conducting stakeholder interviews to develop initial programme theories, systematic searches of the evidence to test and develop the theories, and the validation of programme theories with a purposive sample of stakeholders. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-six stakeholders (user/patient representatives, dementia care providers, clinicians specialising in dementia or diabetes and researchers) took part in interviews and 24 participated in a consensus conference. DATA SOURCES: The following databases were searched from 1990 to March 2016: MEDLINE (PubMed), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, The Cochrane Library (including the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, AgeInfo (Centre for Policy on Ageing - UK), Social Care Online, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) portfolio database, NHS Evidence, Google (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA) and Google Scholar (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA). RESULTS: We included 89 papers. Ten papers focused directly on people living with dementia and diabetes, and the rest related to people with dementia or diabetes or other long-term conditions. We identified six context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations that provide an explanatory account of how interventions might work to improve the management of diabetes in people living with dementia. This includes embedding positive attitudes towards people living with dementia, person-centred approaches to care planning, developing skills to provide tailored and flexible care, regular contact, family engagement and usability of assistive devices. A general metamechanism that emerges concerns the synergy between an intervention strategy, the dementia trajectory and social and environmental factors, especially family involvement. A flexible service model for people with dementia and diabetes would enable this synergy in a way that would lead to the improved management of diabetes in people living with dementia. LIMITATIONS: There is little evidence relating to the management of diabetes in people living with dementia, although including a wider literature provided opportunities for transferable learning. The outcomes in our CMOs are largely experiential rather than clinical. This reflects the evidence available. Outcomes such as increased engagement in self-management are potential surrogates for better clinical management of diabetes, but this is not proven. CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that there is a need to prioritise quality of life, independence and patient and carer priorities over a more biomedical, target-driven approach. Much current research, particularly that specific to people living with dementia and diabetes, identifies deficiencies in, and problems with, current systems. Although we have highlighted the need for personalised care, continuity and family-centred approaches, there is much evidence to suggest that this is not currently happening. Future research on the management of diabetes in older people with complex health needs, including those with dementia, needs to look at how organisational structures and workforce development can be better aligned to the needs of people living with dementia and diabetes. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015020625. FUNDING: The NIHR HTA programme.

Probiotics for Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhoea (PAAD): a prospective observational study of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (including Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea) in care homes.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic prescribing rates in care homes are higher than in the general population. Antibiotics disrupt the normal gut flora, sometimes causing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD). Clostridium difficile (Hall and O'Toole 1935) Prévot 1938 is the most commonly identified cause of AAD. Little is known either about the frequency or type of antibiotics prescribed in care homes or about the incidence and aetiology of AAD in this setting. OBJECTIVES: The Probiotics for Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhoea (PAAD) study was designed as a two-stage study. PAAD stage 1 aimed to (1) prospectively describe antibiotic prescribing in care homes; (2) determine the incidence of C. difficile carriage and AAD (including C. difficile-associated diarrhoea); and (3) to consider implementation challenges and establish the basis for a sample size estimation for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of probiotic administration with antibiotics to prevent AAD in care homes. If justified by PAAD stage 1, the RCT would be implemented in PAAD stage 2. However, as a result of new evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness of probiotics on the incidence of AAD, a decision was taken not to proceed with PAAD stage 2. DESIGN: PAAD stage 1 was a prospective observational cohort study in care homes in South Wales with up to 12 months' follow-up for each resident. SETTING: Recruited care homes had management and owner's agreement to participate and three or more staff willing to take responsibility for implementing the study. PARTICIPANTS: Eleven care homes were recruited, but one withdrew before any residents were recruited. A total of 279 care home residents were recruited to the observational study and 19 withdrew, 16 (84%) because of moving to a non-participating care home. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the rate of antibiotic prescribing, incidence of AAD, defined as three or more loose stools (type 5-7 on the Bristol Stool Chart) in a 24-hour period, and C. difficile carriage confirmed on stool culture. RESULTS: Stool samples were obtained at study entry from 81% of participating residents. Over half of the samples contained antibiotic-resistant isolates, with Enterobacteriaceae resistant to ciprofloxacin in 47%. Residents were prescribed an average of 2.16 antibiotic prescriptions per year [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.90 to 2.46]. Antibiotics were less likely to be prescribed to residents from dual-registered homes. The incidence of AAD was 0.57 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.81) episodes per year among those residents who were prescribed antibiotics. AAD was more likely in residents who were prescribed co-amoxiclav than other antibiotics and in those residents who routinely used incontinence pads. AAD was less common in residents from residential homes. CONCLUSIONS: Care home residents, particularly in nursing homes, are frequently prescribed antibiotics and often experience AAD. Antibiotic resistance, including ciprofloxacin resistance, is common in Enterobacteriaceae isolated from the stool of care home residents. Co-amoxiclav is associated with greater risk of AAD than other commonly prescribed antibiotics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 7954844. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

An evaluation of the effectiveness of a multi-modal intervention in frail and pre-frail older people with type 2 diabetes--the MID-Frail study: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes, a highly prevalent, chronic disease, is associated with increasing frailty and functional decline in older people, with concomitant personal, social, and public health implications. We describe the rationale and methods of the multi-modal intervention in diabetes in frailty (MID-Frail) study. METHODS/DESIGN: The MID-Frail study is an open, randomised, multicentre study, with random allocation by clusters (each trial site) to a usual care group or an intervention group. A total of 1,718 subjects will be randomised with each site enrolling on average 14 or 15 subjects. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate, in comparison with usual clinical practice, the effectiveness of a multi-modal intervention (specific clinical targets, education, diet, and resistance training exercise) in frail and pre-frail subjects aged ≥70 years with type 2 diabetes in terms of the difference in function 2 years post-randomisation. Difference in function will be measured by changes in a summary ordinal score on the short physical performance battery (SPPB) of at least one point. Secondary outcomes include daily activities, economic evaluation, and quality of life. DISCUSSION: The MID-Frail study will provide evidence on the clinical, functional, social, and economic impact of a multi-modal approach in frail and pre-frail older people with type 2 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01654341.

Goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation in early-stage dementia: study protocol for a multi-centre single-blind randomised controlled trial (GREAT).

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence suggests that goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation (CR) may be a clinically effective intervention for people with early-stage Alzheimer's disease, vascular or mixed dementia and their carers. This study aims to establish whether CR is a clinically effective and cost-effective intervention for people with early-stage dementia and their carers. METHODS/DESIGN: In this multi-centre, single-blind randomised controlled trial, 480 people with early-stage dementia, each with a carer, will be randomised to receive either treatment as usual or cognitive rehabilitation (10 therapy sessions over 3 months, followed by 4 maintenance sessions over 6 months). We will compare the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation with that of treatment as usual with regard to improving self-reported and carer-rated goal performance in areas identified as causing concern by people with early-stage dementia; improving quality of life, self-efficacy, mood and cognition of people with early-stage dementia; and reducing stress levels and ameliorating quality of life for carers of participants with early-stage dementia. The incremental cost-effectiveness of goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation compared to treatment as usual will also be examined. DISCUSSION: If the study confirms the benefits and cost-effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation, it will be important to examine how the goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation approach can most effectively be integrated into routine health-care provision. Our aim is to provide training and develop materials to support the implementation of this approach following trial completion.

Childhood socioeconomic position and objectively measured physical capability levels in adulthood: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Grip strength, walking speed, chair rising and standing balance time are objective measures of physical capability that characterise current health and predict survival in older populations. Socioeconomic position (SEP) in childhood may influence the peak level of physical capability achieved in early adulthood, thereby affecting levels in later adulthood. We have undertaken a systematic review with meta-analyses to test the hypothesis that adverse childhood SEP is associated with lower levels of objectively measured physical capability in adulthood. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Relevant studies published by May 2010 were identified through literature searches using EMBASE and MEDLINE. Unpublished results were obtained from study investigators. Results were provided by all study investigators in a standard format and pooled using random-effects meta-analyses. 19 studies were included in the review. Total sample sizes in meta-analyses ranged from N = 17,215 for chair rise time to N = 1,061,855 for grip strength. Although heterogeneity was detected, there was consistent evidence in age adjusted models that lower childhood SEP was associated with modest reductions in physical capability levels in adulthood: comparing the lowest with the highest childhood SEP there was a reduction in grip strength of 0.13 standard deviations (95% CI: 0.06, 0.21), a reduction in mean walking speed of 0.07 m/s (0.05, 0.10), an increase in mean chair rise time of 6% (4%, 8%) and an odds ratio of an inability to balance for 5s of 1.26 (1.02, 1.55). Adjustment for the potential mediating factors, adult SEP and body size attenuated associations greatly. However, despite this attenuation, for walking speed and chair rise time, there was still evidence of moderate associations. CONCLUSIONS: Policies targeting socioeconomic inequalities in childhood may have additional benefits in promoting the maintenance of independence in later life.

Socio-economic disadvantage from childhood to adulthood and locomotor function in old age: a lifecourse analysis of the Boyd Orr and Caerphilly prospective studies.

BACKGROUND: Socio-economic influences over a lifetime impact on health and may contribute to poor physical functioning in old age. METHODS: The authors examined the impact of both childhood and adulthood socio-economic factors on locomotor function at 63-86 years (measured with the get up and go timed walk and flamingo balance test) in the UK-based Boyd Orr (n=405) and Caerphilly (n=1196) prospective cohorts. RESULTS: There was a marked reduction in walking speed and balance time with increasing age. Each year of age was associated with a 1.7% slower walk time and a 14% increased odds of poor balance. Participants who moved from a low socio-economic position in childhood to a high socio-economic position in adulthood had 3% slower walking times (95% CI -2% to 8%) than people with a high socio-economic position in both periods. Participants who moved from a high socio-economic position in childhood to a low adulthood socio-economic position had 5% slower walking times (95% CI -2% to 12%). Participants with a low socio-economic position in both periods had 10% slower walking times (95% CI 5% to 16%; p for trend <0.001). In Boyd Orr, low socio-economic position in childhood was associated with poor balance in old age (OR per worsening category=1.26; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.57; p=0.043), as was socio-economic position in adulthood (OR=1.71; 95% CI 1.20 to 2.45; p=0.003). Similar associations were not observed in Caerphilly. CONCLUSION: Accumulating socio-economic disadvantage from childhood to adulthood is associated with slower walking time in old age, with mixed results for balance ability.