[Impact of animal-assisted therapy on well-being in patients with Alzheimer's disease (ELIAUT study)]. / Impact de la thérapie assistée par l'animal sur le bien être chez des patients présentant une maladie d'Alzheimer (étude ELIAUT).

The development of non-pharmacological interventions, including animal-assisted therapy (AAT), is an encouraging method for the care of people with Alzheimer's disease (AD). A single-center, randomized, single-blind, controlled intervention study was proposed to compare immediate well-being measured by a visual analog scale (EVIBE) as primary outcome between the intervention group (AAT combined with cognitive stimulation) and the control group (cognitive stimulation only) in AD patients. Secondary outcomes were explored, such as well-being after intervention (also with the EVIBE), cognitive performance (measured by Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, cognitive part GRECO version), behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Behavioral Scale-Nursing Home Version), current depressive symptomatology (with the 30 items Geriatric Depression Scale [GDS 30]) and anxiety (by the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory). Forty-two patients were included, 22 in the intervention group and 20 in the control group. The mean age was 82.5 years and mean MMSE score 19.2 in the control group and 81.4 years and mean MMSE score 18.4 in the TAA group. The results show a significant effect of the intervention on well-being after four weeks (p = 0.048), but no significant effect on cognitive functioning, behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia. This study shows a small effect of TAA on well-being four weeks after the end of the intervention. The assessment of well-being by another measurement tool and the collection of observations made by the care team could be explored in future studies, which could require a larger sample and a longer follow-up.

Can Musical or Painting Interventions Improve Chronic Pain, Mood, Quality of Life, and Cognition in Patients with Mild Alzheimer's Disease? Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Among non-pharmacological therapies, musical intervention is often used for patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and patients presenting chronic pain. However, their efficacy is still under debate. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine the efficacy of choral singing versus painting sessions on chronic pain, mood, quality of life, and cognition in AD patients. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, 59 mild AD patients were randomized to a 12-week singing (SG; n = 31) or painting group (PG; n = 28). Chronic pain, anxiety, depression, and quality of life were assessed before, after, and 1 month after the sessions. Cognitive abilities were assessed before and after interventions. The evolution of these different measures was assessed with mixed linear models. The primary data analysis was by intention-to-treat, and completed by a 'per protocol' approach. RESULTS: Both singing and painting interventions led to significant pain reduction (Time effect: F = 4.71; p = 0.01), reduced anxiety (Time effect: F = 10.74; p < 0.0001), improved Quality of Life (Time effect: F = 6.79; p = 0.002), improved digit span (F = 12.93; p = 0.001), and inhibitory processes (Time effect: F = 4.93; p = 0.03). Depression was reduced over time in PG only (Time x Group effect: F = 4.53; p = 0.01). Verbal Memory performance remained stable over time in SG, but decreased in PG (Time x group effect: F = 9.29; p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that singing and painting interventions may reduce pain and improve mood, quality of life, and cognition in patients with mild AD, with differential effects of painting for depression and singing for memory performance.

Clinical impact of the implantable loop recorder in patients with isolated syncope, bundle branch block and negative workup: a randomized multicentre prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have compared conventional testing with prolonged monitoring using an implantable loop recorder (ILR) following the first syncope episode in patients with bundle branch block (BBB) and negative workup. OBJECTIVES: To compare two syncope evaluation strategies-primary use of an ILR (Group 1) versus conventional testing (Group 2)-and to estimate the prevalence of significant arrhythmias in the ILR patient subset. METHODS: From January 2005 to December 2010, 78 patients admitted after one syncope episode were randomized to ILR (n=41) or conventional follow-up (n=37). Mean follow-up was 27 ± 12 months. RESULTS: Mean age was 76 ± 8 years and 30 patients were women (38.5%); 18 presented cardiomyopathy (23%) and 12 had a history of atrial fibrillation (15.4%). Mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 56.5 ± 11% and mean His-to-ventricle interval was 55 ± 6ms based on negative electrophysiological study (EPS). Electrocardiogram abnormalities involved: 34 left bundle branch blocks (BBBs); 11 right BBBs; and 33 bifascicular blocks. Overall, 21 patients (27%) developed significant arrhythmic events: ventricular tachycardia (n=1; 1.3%); sudden death (n=2; 2.6%); third-degree atrioventricular (AV) block (n=14; 18%); sick sinus syndrome (n=4; 5.1%). In 19 (24.4%) patients, relevant arrhythmias were detected, with a significant difference between the ILR group (n=15/41; 36.6%) and the conventional follow-up group (n=4/37; 10.8%) (P=0.02). Eighteen patients were implanted with pacemakers; one received an implantable defibrillator. No predictors of AV block were identified in the ILR group. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized prospective study, the ILR strategy proved largely superior to conventional follow-up in detecting recurrent events, with a potential impact on therapeutic management. This observation highlights the usefulness of early monitoring in patients with BBB and negative EPS even after the first syncope episode but an empiric pacemaker strategy remains to be validated in this selected population.