Food resources and kitchen skills plus aerobic training (FoRKS+) for black adults with hypertension: A pilot trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Midlife hypertension is associated with cognitive decline and Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD), suggesting that blood pressure control may be a therapeutic target for dementia prevention. Given excess hypertension in non-Hispanic Black (NHB) adults, blood pressure control may also reduce ADRD disparities. We describe a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a multicomponent lifestyle-based intervention versus enhanced usual care on cognition among middle-aged NHB adults. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: The Food Resources and Kitchen Skills plus Aerobic Training (FoRKS+) study is a 2-arm, single-blinded trial that compares those receiving the FoRKS+ program (target N = 64) versus those receiving enhanced usual care (target N = 64) in local federally-qualified health centers. Key eligibility criteria include self-identified NHB adults between ages 35-75 with a mean systolic blood pressure ≥ 130 mm/Hg obtained from 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. The FoRKS+ program includes 5 weeks of hypertension self-management courses, 11 weeks of nutrition courses, and 12 weeks of aerobic training in dietitian and health coach-led virtual groups. We will collect data on primary cognitive outcomes, feasibility, hypothesized intervention mediators and moderators, and demographic and health covariates at baseline, near intervention weeks 16-, and 28 (primary outcome assessment), and week 52 follow-up. We will use mixed-effects modeling to examine intervention effects on cognition. DISCUSSION: This pilot RCT will examine the feasibility and preliminary effects of a multicomponent lifestyle intervention on cognitive function in NHB adults, which may have implications for reducing health disparities in ADRD.

MIND food and speed of processing training in older adults with low education, the MINDSpeed Alzheimer's disease prevention pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Multiple national organizations and leaders have called for increased attention to dementia prevention in those most vulnerable, for example persons with limited formal education. Prevention recommendations have included calls for multicomponent interventions that have the potential to improve both underlying neurobiological health and the ability to function despite neurobiological pathology, or what has been termed cognitive reserve. OBJECTIVES: Test feasibility, treatment modifier, mechanism, and cognitive function effects of a multicomponent intervention consisting of foods high in polyphenols (i.e., MIND foods) to target neurobiological health, and speed of processing training to enhance cognitive reserve. We refer to this multicomponent intervention as MINDSpeed. DESIGN: MINDSpeed is being evaluated in a 2 × 2 randomized factorial design with 180 participants residing independently in a large Midwestern city. Qualifying participants are 60 years of age or older with no evidence of dementia, and who have completed 12 years or less of education. All participants receive a study-issued iPad to access the custom study application that enables participants, depending on randomization, to select either control or MIND food, and to play online cognitive games, either speed of processing or control games. METHODS: All participants complete informed consent and baseline assessment, including urine and blood samples. Additionally, up to 90 participants will complete neuroimaging. Assessments are repeated immediately following 12 weeks of active intervention, and at 24 weeks post-randomization. The primary outcome is an executive cognitive composite score. Secondary outcomes include oxidative stress, pro-inflammatory cytokines, and neuroimaging-captured structural and functional metrics of the hippocampus and cortical brain regions. SUMMARY: MINDSpeed is the first study to evaluate the multicomponent intervention of high polyphenol intake and speed of processing training. It is also one of the first dementia prevention trials to target older adults with low education. The results of the study will guide future dementia prevention efforts and trials in high risk populations.

Does targeted cognitive training reduce educational disparities in cognitive function among cognitively normal older adults?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate educational differences in treatment responses to memory, reasoning, and speed of processing cognitive training relative to no-contact control. METHODS: Secondary analyses of the Advanced Cognitive Training for Independent and Vital Elderly trial were conducted. Two thousand eight hundred older adults were randomized to memory, reasoning, or speed of processing training or no-contact control. A repeated-measures mixed-effects model was used to investigate immediate post-training and 1-year outcomes with sensitivity analyses out to 10 years. Outcomes were as follows: (1) memory composite of Hopkins Verbal Learning Test, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, and Rivermead Behavioral Memory Test; (2) reasoning composite of letter series, letter sets, and word series; and (3) speed of processing measured using three trials of useful field of view and the digit symbol substitution test. RESULTS: The effects of reasoning and memory training did not differ by educational attainment. The effect of speed of processing training did. Those with fewer than 12 years of education experienced a 50% greater effect on the useful field of view test compared with those with 16 or more years of education. The training advantage for those with fewer than 12 years of education was maintained to 3 years post-training. CONCLUSION: Older adults with less than a secondary education are at elevated risk of dementia, including Alzheimer's disease. The analyses here indicate that speed of processing training is effective in older adults with low educational attainment.

Relationship of demographic and health factors to cognition in older adults in the ACTIVE study.

OBJECTIVE: Examine the relationship of demographics and health conditions, alone and in combination, on objective measures of cognitive function in a large sample of community-dwelling older adults. METHOD: Baseline data from 2,782 participants in the Advanced Cognitive Training in Independent and Vital Elderly (ACTIVE) study were used to examine relationships of demographics and health conditions with composite scores of memory, reasoning, and speed of processing. RESULTS: Younger age, increased education, and White race were independently associated with better performance in each cognitive domain after adjusting for gender and health conditions. Male gender, diabetes, and suspected clinical depression were associated with poorer cognitive functioning; suspected clinical depression was associated with lower reasoning and diabetes and history of stroke with slower speed of processing. DISCUSSION: Age, education, and race are consistently associated with cognitive performance in this sample of older community-dwelling adults. Diabetes, stroke, and suspected clinical depression had independent but weaker effects on cognition.

The ACTIVE cognitive training trial and predicted medical expenditures.

BACKGROUND: Health care expenditures for older adults are disproportionately high and increasing at both the individual and population levels. We evaluated the effects of the three cognitive training interventions (memory, reasoning, or speed of processing) in the ACTIVE study on changes in predicted medical care expenditures. METHODS: ACTIVE was a multisite randomized controlled trial of older adults (>or= 65). Five-year follow-up data were available for 1,804 of the 2,802 participants. Propensity score weighting was used to adjust for potential attrition bias. Changes in predicted annualmedical expenditures were calculated at the first and fifth annual follow-up assessments using a new method for translating functional status scores. Multiple linear regression methods were used in this cost-offset analysis. RESULTS: At one and five years post-training, annual predicted expenditures declinedby $223 (p = .024) and $128 (p = .309), respectively, in the speed of processing treatment group, but there were no statistically significant changes in the memory or reasoning treatment groups compared to the no-contact control group at either period. Statistical adjustment for age, race, education, MMSE scores, ADL and IADL performance scores, EPT scores, chronic condition counts, and the SF-36 PCS and MCS scores at baseline did not alter the one-year ($244; p = .012) or five-year ($143; p = .250) expenditure declines in the speed of processing treatment group. CONCLUSION: The speed of processing intervention significantly reduced subsequent annual predicted medical care expenditures at the one-year post-baseline comparison, but annual savings were no longer statistically significant at the five-year post-baseline comparison.

The Indiana University telephone-based assessment of neuropsychological status: a new method for large scale neuropsychological assessment.

Sensitive measures of neuropsychological function were adapted to a telephone administration format for use in a large survey of quality of life in breast cancer survivors (BCS). Healthy controls (HC) and BCS were recruited from the community and administered the same neuropsychological test battery on two occasions separated by 1 week. Subjects were randomly assigned to conditions, stratified by diagnosis: In-person at Time-1 and In-person at Time-2 (P-P); Telephone at Time-1 and Telephone at Time-2 (T-T); T-P; and P-T. Four cognitive (Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Controlled Oral Word Association, Digit Span, Symbol Digit) and two self-report measures (Squire Memory Self-Report Scale, Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale) were used. The 106 subjects were randomized (54 HC and 52 BCS). Test-retest reliabilities (intraclass correlations) did not differ significantly by condition across the cognitive or self-report measures and ranged from moderate to near perfect (r's .43-.93; p's<.05). Mean scores at Time-1, practice effects (Time-1 to Time-2), and standard errors of measurement were comparable between In-person and Telephone administration formats. Results suggest that memory, attention, information processing speed, verbal fluency, and self-report of mood and memory can be measured reliably and precisely over the telephone.

Implementing a screening and diagnosis program for dementia in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Primary care physicians are positioned to provide early recognition and treatment of dementia. We evaluated the feasibility and utility of a comprehensive screening and diagnosis program for dementia in primary care. METHODS: We screened individuals aged 65 and older attending 7 urban and racially diverse primary care practices in Indianapolis. Dementia was diagnosed according to International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 criteria by an expert panel using the results of neuropsychologic testing and information collected from patients, caregivers, and medical records. RESULTS: Among 3,340 patients screened, 434 scored positive but only 227 would agree to a formal diagnostic assessment. Among those who completed the diagnostic assessment, 47% were diagnosed with dementia, 33% had cognitive impairment-no dementia (CIND), and 20% were considered to have no cognitive deficit. The overall estimated prevalence of dementia was 6.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.5% to 6.6%) and the overall estimate of the program cost was $128 per patient screened for dementia and $3,983 per patient diagnosed with dementia. Only 19% of patients with confirmed dementia diagnosis had documentation of dementia in their medical record. CONCLUSIONS: Dementia is common and undiagnosed in primary care. Screening instruments alone have insufficient specificity to establish a valid diagnosis of dementia when used in a comprehensive screening program; these results may not be generalized to older adults presenting with cognitive complaints. Multiple health system and patient-level factors present barriers to this formal assessment and thus render the current standard of care for dementia diagnosis impractical in primary care settings.