Changes in the burden of medications that may impair driving among older adults before and after a motor vehicle crash.

BACKGROUND: Medications are one of the most easily modifiable risk factors for motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) among older adults, yet limited information exists on how the use of potentially driver-impairing (PDI) medications changes following an MVC. Therefore, we examined the number and types of PDI medication classes dispensed before and after an MVC. METHODS: This observational study included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged ≥67 years who were involved in a police-reported MVC in New Jersey as a driver between 2008 and 2017. Analyses were conducted at the "person-crash" level because participants could be involved in more than one MVC. We examined the use of 36 PDI medication classes in the 120 days before and 120 days after MVC. We described the number and prevalence of PDI medication classes in the pre-MVC and post-MVC periods as well as the most common PDI medication classes started and stopped following the MVC. RESULTS: Among 124,954 person-crashes, the mean (SD) age was 76.0 (6.5) years, 51.3% were female, and 83.9% were non-Hispanic White. The median (Q1 , Q3 ) number of PDI medication classes was 2 (1, 4) in both the pre-MVC and post-MVC periods. Overall, 20.3% had a net increase, 15.9% had a net decrease, and 63.8% had no net change in the number of PDI medication classes after MVC. Opioids, antihistamines, and thiazide diuretics were the top PDI medication classes stopped following MVC, at incidences of 6.2%, 2.1%, and 1.7%, respectively. The top medication classes started were opioids (8.3%), skeletal muscle relaxants (2.2%), and benzodiazepines (2.1%). CONCLUSIONS: A majority of crash-involved older adults were exposed to multiple PDI medications before and after MVC. A greater proportion of person-crashes were associated with an increased rather than decreased number of PDI medications. The reasons why clinicians refrain from stopping PDI medications following an MVC remain to be elucidated.

The complementary utility of cognitive testing and the medication management ability assessment in older adults.

OBJECTIVE: Older adults are susceptible to cognitive declines that may limit independence. Though neuropsychologists opine about risk of functional decline, the degree to which cognitive testing and in-office simulations approximate everyday behavior is unclear. We assessed the complementary utility of cognitive testing and the face-valid Medication Management Ability Assessment (MMAA) to predict medication management among older adults. METHOD: This was a retrospective study of 234 older adults (age = 72 ± 7.7 years; 59% women) who completed the MMAA during outpatient neuropsychological evaluations. Based on comprehensive clinical assessment, most participants (n = 186) were independent in medication management, while 48 received assistance. Demographically adjusted composite scores were derived for attention/processing speed (A/PS), executive functioning (EF), visuospatial/constructional ability (VC), language, and memory domains. Univariate differences in cognition were examined across Assisted versus Independent groups. Logistic regression assessed which cognitive domains independently predicted group status. The incremental value of the MMAA was assessed, holding uniquely associated cognitive test scores constant. RESULTS: Those receiving assistance with medication management performed worse across all neurocognitive domains and the MMAA compared with independent counterparts. EF was the only unique cognitive predictor of medication management status. When modeled alone, EF and MMAA performance correctly classified 79.5% and 80.8% of cases, respectively. When modeled together, both were independently associated with medication management status and correctly classified 83.3% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: EF uniquely predicted medication management status beyond other cognitive domains. The MMAA provided complementary predictive utility. Concurrent interpretation of executive functioning and MMAA performance is advised when assessing older adults suspected of medication mismanagement. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The Clinical Utility and Ecological Validity of the Medication Management Ability Assessment in Older Adults with and without Dementia.

OBJECTIVE: Older adults are susceptible to medication nonadherence, which may signify functional decline. Thus, performance-based proxies of medication-taking behavior may help diagnose dementia. We assessed the Medication Management Ability Assessment's (MMAA) clinical utility and ecological validity. METHOD: This was a retrospective chart review of 180 outpatients (age = 72 ± 8 years) who completed the MMAA during clinical evaluations. Forty-seven were cognitively normal (CN), 103 had mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and 30 had dementia. Most (136) were independent in medication management, whereas 28 were assisted and 16 were dependent. Kruskal-Wallis tests assessed whether MMAA scores differed by diagnosis and independence. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses identified diagnostic cut-offs. Classification accuracy estimates were derived. RESULTS: MMAA performance differed across diagnosis as expected (p's < .001). Those who were independent in medication management outperformed assisted and dependent counterparts (p's < .001). Assisted and dependent cases were no different. At a cut-off = 23, the MMAA was good-to-strong in distinguishing dementia from CN cases (Sn = 0.96, Sp = 0.83), dementia from MCI (Sn = 0.70, Sp = 0.83), and dementia from functionally unimpaired cases (Sn = 0.78, Sp = 0.83). At a cut-off = 27, it had good sensitivity but weaker specificity when distinguishing both MCI and all cognitively impaired patients (MCI and dementia) from CN cases (Sn = 0.81, Sp = 0.66 and Sn = 0.81, Sp = 0.72, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The MMAA has ecological validity and clinical utility in identifying dementia. Its inclusion in neuropsychological practice may be especially useful when medication mismanagement is suspected.

Forward to the past: Revisiting the role of immediate recognition in the assessment of episodic memory.

Introduction: During the clinical assessment of episodic memory, encoding ability is typically inferred from immediate recall performance. This dependency on effortful retrieval may not be optimal for estimating encoding, particularly in the presence of executive dysfunction. We examined whether a test of immediate recognition memory could meaningfully supplement recall in estimating encoding and provide unique information about memory retention.Method: Fifty older adult outpatients were administered a neuropsychological test battery including original and revised versions of the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test; the former (HVLT) assesses recognition memory immediately after learning trials, while the latter (HVLT-R) assesses only delayed recognition. Hierarchical regressions evaluated the incremental value of immediate recognition in predicting both delayed verbal and visual recognition. ANCOVA was performed on subgroups defined by the number of impaired performances on executive functioning tests (EF-intact, EF-1, EF-2) to examine the influence of executive impairment on measures of immediate recall and recognition. Recall- and recognition-based estimates of verbal memory retention were also compared across groups to determine whether they yield distinct patterns of memory consolidation.Results: Immediate verbal recognition accounted for significant variance in both delayed verbal and visual recognition beyond immediate recall, age, and education. Although subgroups were demographically similar, EF-1 and EF-2 performed significantly worse than EF-intact across verbal and visual memory recall. Contrastingly, there were no group differences in immediate recognition. Subgroups attained similar scores on a conventional, recall-based memory retention measure, but EF-2 showed relatively greater forgetting on a recognition-based retention measure.Conclusions: Immediate verbal recognition is an independent determinant of delayed memory performance but is not captured in current test paradigms. Study results provide proof-of-concept that recognition testing at learning can provide a more comprehensive index of encoding ability than recall alone, may facilitate disentangling memory functions from executive deficits, and could have important downstream implications for estimating memory consolidation.

The Screening Utility and Ecological Validity of the Neuropsychological Assessment Battery Bill Payment Subtest in Older Adults with and without Dementia.

OBJECTIVE: The Neuropsychological Assessment Battery Bill Payment subtest has shown strong diagnostic accuracy in dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) versus non-AD. Its relationship to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or all-cause dementia has not been fully examined nor has its ecological validity as a proxy of financial independence. METHOD: We describe 270 women (63%) and men (age = 72 ± 8.39) who completed Bill Payment during outpatient neuropsychological evaluation. Seventy-one were cognitively normal (CN), 160 had MCI, and 39 had Dementia. Two hundred fourteen were independent in money management, 31 were assisted (had oversight/some help), and 25 were dependent (relied on others). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves tested Bill Payment's utility as a dementia screen. Kruskal-Wallis tests examined whether Bill Payment differed by levels of financial independence. RESULTS: At a cutoff of 17, Bill Payment had strong sensitivity (0.87) and specificity (0.80) for dementia versus CN cases. A cutoff of 15 distinguished dementia from MCI (Sn = 0.64, Sp = 0.85), whereas a cutoff of 16 distinguished dementia from functionally unimpaired cases (MCI + CN) with greater sensitivity and similar specificity (Sn = 0.74, Sp = 0.81). Sensitivity attenuated in MCI versus CN cases (Sn = 0.46, Sp = 0.83). Those who were independent in money management had higher scores than assisted and dependent cases (p ≤ 0.046). Assisted and dependent cases were no different (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Bill Payment is a valid screen of all-cause dementia. Lower Bill Payment scores may mark subtle functional decline beyond cognitive impairment alone. Specifically, results provide preliminary evidence of Bill Payment's ecological validity as a measure related to financial independence. It may prove useful when impaired financial abilities are suspected but unreported.

Assessment of medication management capacity in a predominantly African American and Caribbean American sample of adults with intractable epilepsy.

INTRODUCTION: Suboptimal or partial adherence to antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) is an avoidable cause of seizures and deleterious outcomes in epilepsy. As self-rated adherence may be unreliable, suboptimal adherence may go undetected. This study assessed generalizability of a performance-based measure of medication management to patients with intractable epilepsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants were 50 adults (age = 42 ±â€¯14 years, 60% female, 82% Black, 20% Hispanic/Latino) with ≥2 seizures in the preceding 6 months. Antiepileptic drug adherence was electronically monitored for one month via Medication Event Monitoring Systems (MEMS) and self-rated (1 = very poor to 6 = excellent). The Medication Management Ability Assessment (MMAA) was administered at follow-up and scored by raters blind to adherence results. Spearman correlations and Poisson regressions assessed their associations. RESULTS: On average, participants self-reported good-to-very good adherence. According to MEMS, participants took AEDs as prescribed 73% of the time; most participants (58%) missed ≥3 doses. The MMAA demonstrated strong internal consistency (Kuder-Richardson 20 = 0.81) and was associated with MEMS: percentage of days doses were taken correctly (rs = 0.29, p = 0.04) and frequency of missed doses (rs = -0.31, p = 0.03). The MMAA was not associated with self-rated adherence. Poisson regressions showed that self-ratings and MMAA performance accounted for unique variance in frequency of missed AED doses. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide evidence of the MMAA's criterion validity as a measure of capacity to manage AEDs. It may prove useful in cases where suboptimal adherence is suspected but unreported by patients. Its lack of significant association with self-rated adherence is consistent with prior reports; however, future studies should replicate these findings with larger samples.