Has COVID-19 affected dementia diagnosis rates in England?

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted on the provision of care and routine activity of all National Health Service (NHS) services. While General Practitioner referrals to memory services in England have returned to pre-pandemic levels, the estimated dementia diagnosis rate (DDR) fell by 5.4% between March 2020 and February 2023. METHODS: In this paper we explore whether this reduction is accurate or is an artefact of the way the NHS collects data. RESULTS: We explore the processes that may have affected national dementia diagnosis rates during and following the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: We discuss what action could be taken to improve the DDR in the future.

Study of mirtazapine for agitated behaviours in dementia (SYMBAD): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Agitation is common in people with dementia and negatively affects the quality of life of both people with dementia and carers. Non-drug patient-centred care is the first-line treatment, but there is a need for other treatment when this care is not effective. Current evidence is sparse on safer and effective alternatives to antipsychotics. We assessed the efficacy and safety of mirtazapine, an antidepressant prescribed for agitation in dementia. METHODS: This parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial-the Study of Mirtazapine for Agitated Behaviours in Dementia trial (SYMBAD)-was done in 26 UK centres. Participants had probable or possible Alzheimer's disease, agitation unresponsive to non-drug treatment, and a Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) score of 45 or more. They were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either mirtazapine (titrated to 45 mg) or placebo. The primary outcome was reduction in CMAI score at 12 weeks. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03031184, and ISRCTN17411897. FINDINGS: Between Jan 26, 2017, and March 6, 2020, 204 participants were recruited and randomised. Mean CMAI scores at 12 weeks were not significantly different between participants receiving mirtazapine and participants receiving placebo (adjusted mean difference -1·74, 95% CI -7·17 to 3·69; p=0·53). The number of controls with adverse events (65 [64%] of 102 controls) was similar to that in the mirtazapine group (67 [66%] of 102 participants receiving mirtazapine). However, there were more deaths in the mirtazapine group (n=7) by week 16 than in the control group (n=1), with post-hoc analysis suggesting this difference was of marginal statistical significance (p=0·065). INTERPRETATION: This trial found no benefit of mirtazapine compared with placebo, and we observed a potentially higher mortality with use of mirtazapine. The data from this study do not support using mirtazapine as a treatment for agitation in dementia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Cost-effectiveness of mirtazapine for agitated behaviors in dementia: findings from a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the costs and cost-effectiveness of mirtazapine compared to placebo over 12-week follow-up. DESIGN: Economic evaluation in a double-blind randomized controlled trial of mirtazapine vs. placebo. SETTING: Community settings and care homes in 26 UK centers. PARTICIPANTS: People with probable or possible Alzheimer's disease and agitation. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome included incremental cost of participants' health and social care per 6-point difference in CMAI score at 12 weeks. Secondary cost-utility analyses examined participants' and unpaid carers' gain in quality-adjusted life years (derived from EQ-5D-5L, DEMQOL-Proxy-U, and DEMQOL-U) from the health and social care and societal perspectives. RESULTS: One hundred and two participants were allocated to each group; 81 mirtazapine and 90 placebo participants completed a 12-week assessment (87 and 95, respectively, completed a 6-week assessment). Mirtazapine and placebo groups did not differ on mean CMAI scores or health and social care costs over the study period, before or after adjustment for center and living arrangement (independent living/care home). On the primary outcome, neither mirtazapine nor placebo could be considered a cost-effective strategy with a high level of confidence. Groups did not differ in terms of participant self- or proxy-rated or carer self-rated quality of life scores, health and social care or societal costs, before or after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: On cost-effectiveness grounds, the use of mirtazapine cannot be recommended for agitated behaviors in people living with dementia. Effective and cost-effective medications for agitation in dementia remain to be identified in cases where non-pharmacological strategies for managing agitation have been unsuccessful.

A novel hybrid scale for the assessment of cognitive and executive function: The Free-Cog.

BACKGROUND: Scales measuring cognitive and executive functions are integral to the assessment and management of patients with suspected cognitive impairment. Some of the most commonly used cognitive tests are now subject to copyright restrictions. Furthermore, no existing scale assesses both executive and cognitive abilities. AIMS: We aimed to develop and validate a novel hybrid scale for use in clinical practice which integrate measures of cognition and executive abilities ('Free-Cog'). METHODS: The instrument was devised through a national collaboration including health professionals, those with lived experience of dementia and researchers. Following ethics committee approval, the Free-Cog was assessed in 25 real-world clinical settings across England, Wales and Scotland. It was compared to three other cognitive tests routinely administered in clinical practice: the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA), and the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE). RESULTS: The Free-Cog was tested in 960 patients with clinical diagnoses of dementia, Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), and normal controls. Similar to the MMSE, MOCA and ACE, it discriminated well between the three groups (p < 0.001). It correlated well with the other instruments. Using a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, Free-Cog achieved an Area Under Curve of 0.94 for dementia versus controls, 0.80 for MCI versus controls and 0.77 for dementia versus MCI. A version of the tool adapted for telephone consultation, the Tele Free-Cog, also discriminated well between patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: Free-Cog is a non-proprietary, empirically derived, concise assessment. Uniquely, it combines cognitive and executive function questions in the one instrument. It could be used to inform the assessment of people presenting with cognitive impairment and is available to anyone interested in trialling it.

COVID-19 and dementia: experience from six European countries.

The effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been well documented across the world with an appreciation that older people and in particular those with dementia have been disproportionately and negatively affected by the pandemic. This is both in terms of their health outcomes (mortality and morbidity), care decisions made by health systems and the longer-term effects such as neurological damage. The International Dementia Alliance is a group of dementia specialists from six European countries and this paper is a summary of our experience of the effects of COVID-19 on our populations. Experience from England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Switzerland highlight the differential response from health and social care systems and the measures taken to maximise support for older people and those with dementia. The common themes include recognition of the atypical presentation of COVID-19 in older people (and those with dementia) need to pay particular attention to the care of people with dementia in care homes; the recognition of the toll that isolation can bring on older people and the complexity of the response by health and social services to minimise the negative impact of the pandemic. Potential new ways of working identified during the pandemic could serve as a positive legacy from the crisis.

Dementia wellbeing and COVID-19: Review and expert consensus on current research and knowledge gaps.

OBJECTIVES: In response to a commissioned research update on dementia during the COVID-19 pandemic, a UK-based working group, comprising dementia researchers from a range of fields and disciplines, aimed to describe the impact of the pandemic on dementia wellbeing and identify priorities for future research. METHODS: We supplemented a rapid literature search (including unpublished, non-peer reviewed and ongoing studies/reports) on dementia wellbeing in the context of COVID-19 with expert group members' consensus about future research needs. From this we generated potential research questions the group judged to be relevant that were not covered by the existing literature. RESULTS: Themes emerged from 141 studies within the six domains of the NHS England COVID-19 Dementia Wellbeing Pathway: Preventing Well, Diagnosing Well, Treating Well, Supporting Well, Living Well and Dying Well. We describe current research findings and knowledge gaps relating to the impact on people affected by dementia (individuals with a diagnosis, their carers and social contacts, health and social care practitioners and volunteers), services, research activities and organisations. Broad themes included the potential benefits and risks of new models of working including remote healthcare, the need for population-representative longitudinal studies to monitor longer-term impacts, and the importance of reporting dementia-related findings within broader health and care studies. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a disproportionately negative impact on people affected by dementia. Researchers and funding organisations have responded rapidly to try to understand the impacts. Future research should highlight and resolve outstanding questions to develop evidence-based measures to improve the quality of life of people affected by dementia.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of assistive technology and telecare for independent living in dementia: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The use of assistive technology and telecare (ATT) has been promoted to manage risks associated with independent living in people with dementia but with little evidence for effectiveness. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned to receive an ATT assessment followed by installation of all appropriate ATT devices or limited control of appropriate ATT. The primary outcomes were time to institutionalisation and cost-effectiveness. Key secondary outcomes were number of incidents involving risks to safety, burden and stress in family caregivers and quality of life. RESULTS: Participants were assigned to receive full ATT (248 participants) or the limited control (247 participants). After adjusting for baseline imbalance of activities of daily living score, HR for median pre-institutionalisation survival was 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.12; P = 0.20. There were no significant differences between arms in health and social care (mean -£909; 95% CI, -£5,336 to £3,345, P = 0.678) and societal costs (mean -£3,545; 95% CI, -£13,914 to £6,581, P = 0.499). ATT group members had reduced participant-rated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at 104 weeks (mean - 0.105; 95% CI, -0.204 to -0.007, P = 0.037) but did not differ in QALYs derived from proxy-reported EQ-5D. DISCUSSION: Fidelity of the intervention was low in terms of matching ATT assessment, recommendations and installation. This, however, reflects current practice within adult social care in England. CONCLUSIONS: Time living independently outside a care home was not significantly longer in participants who received full ATT and ATT was not cost-effective. Participants with full ATT attained fewer QALYs based on participant-reported EQ-5D than controls at 104 weeks.

Mild cognitive impairment: the Manchester consensus.

Given considerable variation in diagnostic and therapeutic practice, there is a need for national guidance on the use of neuroimaging, fluid biomarkers, cognitive testing, follow-up and diagnostic terminology in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). MCI is a heterogenous clinical syndrome reflecting a change in cognitive function and deficits on neuropsychological testing but relatively intact activities of daily living. MCI is a risk state for further cognitive and functional decline with 5-15% of people developing dementia per year. However, ~50% remain stable at 5 years and in a minority, symptoms resolve over time. There is considerable debate about whether MCI is a useful clinical diagnosis, or whether the use of the term prevents proper inquiry (by history, examination and investigations) into underlying causes of cognitive symptoms, which can include prodromal neurodegenerative disease, other physical or psychiatric illness, or combinations thereof. Cognitive testing, neuroimaging and fluid biomarkers can improve the sensitivity and specificity of aetiological diagnosis, with growing evidence that these may also help guide prognosis. Diagnostic criteria allow for a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease to be made where MCI is accompanied by appropriate biomarker changes, but in practice, such biomarkers are not available in routine clinical practice in the UK. This would change if disease-modifying therapies became available and required a definitive diagnosis but would present major challenges to the National Health Service and similar health systems. Significantly increased investment would be required in training, infrastructure and provision of fluid biomarkers and neuroimaging. Statistical techniques combining markers may provide greater sensitivity and specificity than any single disease marker but their practical usefulness will depend on large-scale studies to ensure ecological validity and that multiple measures, e.g. both cognitive tests and biomarkers, are widely available for clinical use. To perform such large studies, we must increase research participation amongst those with MCI.

The older prisoner health and social care assessment and plan (OHSCAP) versus treatment as usual: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Older people are the fastest-growing demographic group among prisoners in England and Wales and they have complex health and social care needs. Their care is frequently ad hoc and uncoordinated. No previous research has explored how to identify and appropriately address the needs of older adults in prison. We hypothesised that the Older prisoner Health and Social Care Assessment and Plan (OHSCAP) would significantly increase the proportion of met health and social care needs 3 months after prison entry, compared to treatment as usual (TAU). METHODS: The study was a parallel randomised controlled trial (RCT) recruiting male prisoners aged 50 and over from 10 prisons in northern England. Participants received the OHSCAP or TAU. A clinical trials unit used minimisation with a random element as the allocation procedure. Data analysis was conducted blind to allocation status. The intervention group had their needs assessed using the OHSCAP tool and care plans were devised; processes that lasted approximately 30 min in total per prisoner. TAU included the standard prison health assessment and care. The intention to treat principle was followed. The trial was registered with the UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio (ISRCTN ID: 11841493) and was closed on 30 November 2016. RESULTS: Data were collected between 28 January 2014 and 06 April 2016. Two hundred and forty nine older prisoners were assigned TAU of which 32 transferred prison; 12 were released; 2 withdrew and 1 was deemed unsafe to interview. Two hundred and fifty three 3 prisoners were assigned the OHSCAP of which 33 transferred prison; 11 were released; 6 withdrew and 1 was deemed unsafe to interview. Consequently, data from 202 participants were analysed in each of the two groups. There were no significant differences in the number of unmet needs as measured by the Camberwell Assessment of Needs - Forensic Short Version (CANFOR-S). The mean number of unmet needs for the OHSCAP group at follow-up was 2.03 (SD = 2.07) and 2.06 (SD = 2.11) for the TAU group (mean difference = 0.088; 95% CI - 0.276 to 0.449, p = 0.621). No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: The OHSCAP was fundamentally not implemented as planned, partly due to the national prison staffing crisis that ensued during the study period. Therefore, those receiving the OHSCAP did not experience improved outcomes compared to those who received TAU. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN11841493 , 25/10/2012.

Visual hallucinations in neurological and ophthalmological disease: pathophysiology and management.

Visual hallucinations are common in older people and are especially associated with ophthalmological and neurological disorders, including dementia and Parkinson's disease. Uncertainties remain whether there is a single underlying mechanism for visual hallucinations or they have different disease-dependent causes. However, irrespective of mechanism, visual hallucinations are difficult to treat. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) funded a research programme to investigate visual hallucinations in the key and high burden areas of eye disease, dementia and Parkinson's disease, culminating in a workshop to develop a unified framework for their clinical management. Here we summarise the evidence base, current practice and consensus guidelines that emerged from the workshop.Irrespective of clinical condition, case ascertainment strategies are required to overcome reporting stigma. Once hallucinations are identified, physical, cognitive and ophthalmological health should be reviewed, with education and self-help techniques provided. Not all hallucinations require intervention but for those that are clinically significant, current evidence supports pharmacological modification of cholinergic, GABAergic, serotonergic or dopaminergic systems, or reduction of cortical excitability. A broad treatment perspective is needed, including carer support. Despite their frequency and clinical significance, there is a paucity of randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial evidence where the primary outcome is an improvement in visual hallucinations. Key areas for future research include the development of valid and reliable assessment tools for use in mechanistic studies and clinical trials, transdiagnostic studies of shared and distinct mechanisms and when and how to treat visual hallucinations.

Pathways to care for people with dementia: An international multicentre study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to characterize the clinical pathways that people with dementia (PwD) in different countries follow to reach specialized dementia care. METHODS: We recruited 548 consecutive clinical attendees with a standardized diagnosis of dementia, in 19 specialized public centres for dementia care in 15 countries. The WHO "encounter form," a standardized schedule that enables data concerning basic socio-demographic, clinical, and pathways data to be gathered, was completed for each participant. RESULTS: The median time from the appearance of the first symptoms to the first contact with specialist dementia care was 56 weeks. The primary point of access to care was the general practitioners (55.8%). Psychiatrists, geriatricians, and neurologists represented the most important second point of access. In about a third of cases, PwD were prescribed psychotropic drugs (mostly antidepressants and tranquillizers). Psychosocial interventions (such as psychological counselling, psychotherapy, and practical advice) were delivered in less than 3% of situations. The analyses of the "pathways diagram" revealed that the path of PwD to receiving care is complex and diverse across countries and that there are important barriers to clinical care. CONCLUSIONS: The study of pathways followed by PwD to reach specialized care has implications for the subsequent course and the outcome of dementia. Insights into local differences in the clinical presentations and the implementation of currently available dementia care are essential to develop more tailored strategies for these patients, locally, nationally, and internationally.

What is important to people living with dementia?: the 'long-list' of outcome items in the development of a core outcome set for use in the evaluation of non-pharmacological community-based health and social care interventions.

BACKGROUND: Core outcome sets (COS) prioritise outcomes based on their importance to key stakeholders, reduce reporting bias and increase comparability across studies. The first phase of a COS study is to form a 'long-list' of outcomes. Key stakeholders then decide on their importance. COS reporting is described as suboptimal and this first phase is often under-reported. Our objective was to develop a 'long-list' of outcome items for non-pharmacological interventions for people with dementia living at home. METHODS: Three iterative phases were conducted. First, people living with dementia, care partners, health and social care professionals, policymakers and researchers (n = 55) took part in interviews or focus groups and were asked which outcomes were important. Second, existing dementia trials were identified from the ALOIS database. 248 of 1009 pharmacological studies met the inclusion criteria. Primary and secondary outcomes were extracted from a 50% random sample (n = 124) along with eight key reviews/qualitative papers and 38 policy documents. Third, extracted outcome items were translated onto an existing qualitative framework and mapped into domains. The research team removed areas of duplication and refined the 'long-list' in eight workshops. RESULTS: One hundred seventy outcome items were extracted from the qualitative data and literature. The 170 outcome items were consolidated to 54 in four domains (Self-Managing Dementia Symptoms, Quality of Life, Friendly Neighbourhood & Home, Independence). CONCLUSIONS: This paper presents a transparent blueprint for 'long-list' development. Though a useful resource in their own right, the 54 outcome items will be distilled further in a modified Delphi survey and consensus meeting to identify core outcomes.

Cognitive impairment and Charles Bonnet syndrome: a prospective study.

OBJECTIVES: Charles Bonnet syndrome (CBS) is a common cause of visual hallucinations in older people. The relationship between CBS and cognitive impairment is unclear, but anecdotal reports exist of dementia emerging in patients diagnosed with CBS. This work set out to determine if there is an increased incidence of dementia, and increased severity of cognitive impairment, in people with CBS compared to controls from the same clinical setting. METHOD: People over 65 attending low-vision and glaucoma clinics, and a cohort of age-matched controls, underwent a psychiatric assessment. The cohorts were followed up after one year. RESULTS: Mild cognitive impairment was present in 2/12 CBS participants and 2/10 controls. Partial insight was seen in nine CBS participants. Two participants with CBS, and no controls, developed dementia at follow-up. No significant differences in performance on the ACE-R were found between the groups. Both participants who developed dementia had partial insight and hallucinations of familiar figures at diagnosis of CBS, and one had mild cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Reassurance that CBS is universally benign may be misplaced. Some people given this diagnosis go on to develop dementia. Cognitive testing at the point of diagnosis was unable to identify those at risk of this outcome. Partial insight, the presence of Mild Cognitive Impairment, and hallucinations of familiar figures at diagnosis of CBS may confer an increased risk of subsequent dementia diagnosis. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The impact of individual Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (iCST) on cognition, quality of life, caregiver health, and family relationships in dementia: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is a well-established group psychosocial intervention for people with dementia. There is evidence that home-based programmes of cognitive stimulation delivered by family caregivers may benefit both the person and the caregiver. However, no previous studies have evaluated caregiver-delivered CST. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a home-based, caregiver-led individual cognitive stimulation therapy (iCST) program in (i) improving cognition and quality of life (QoL) for the person with dementia and (ii) mental and physical health (well-being) for the caregiver. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A single-blind, pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted at eight study sites across the United Kingdom. The intervention and blinded assessment of outcomes were conducted in participants' homes. Three hundred fifty-six people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers were recruited from memory services and community mental health teams (CMHTs). Participants were randomly assigned to iCST (75, 30-min sessions) or treatment as usual (TAU) control over 25 wk. iCST sessions consisted of themed activities designed to be mentally stimulating and enjoyable. Caregivers delivering iCST received training and support from an unblind researcher. Primary outcomes were cognition (Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive [ADAS-Cog]) and self-reported QoL (Quality of Life Alzheimer's Disease [QoL-AD]) for the person with dementia and general health status (Short Form-12 health survey [SF-12]) for the caregiver. Secondary outcomes included quality of the caregiving relationship from the perspectives of the person and of the caregiver (Quality of the Carer Patient Relationship Scale) and health-related QoL (European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions [EQ-5D]) for the caregiver. Intention to treat (ITT) analyses were conducted. At the post-test (26 wk), there were no differences between the iCST and TAU groups in the outcomes of cognition (mean difference [MD] = -0.55, 95% CI -2.00-0.90; p = 0.45) and self-reported QoL (MD = -0.02, 95% CI -1.22-0.82; p = 0.97) for people with dementia, or caregivers' general health status (MD = 0.13, 95% CI -1.65-1.91; p = 0.89). However, people with dementia receiving iCST rated the relationship with their caregiver more positively (MD = 1.77, 95% CI 0.26-3.28; p = 0.02), and iCST improved QoL for caregivers (EQ-5D, MD = 0.06, 95% CI 0.02-0.10; p = 0.01). Forty percent (72/180) of dyads allocated to iCST completed at least two sessions per week, with 22% (39/180) completing no sessions at all. Study limitations include low adherence to the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that iCST has an effect on cognition or QoL for people with dementia. However, participating in iCST appeared to enhance the quality of the caregiving relationship and caregivers' QoL. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The iCST trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (identified ISRCTN 65945963, URL: DOI 10.1186/ISRCTN65945963).

Taking a positive spin: preserved initiative and performance of everyday activities across mild Alzheimer's, vascular and mixed dementia.

OBJECTIVES: The literature commonly evaluates those daily activities which are impaired in dementia. However, in the mild stages, people with dementia (PwD) are still able to initiate and perform many of those tasks. With a lack of research exploring variations between different dementia diagnoses, this study sought to investigate those daily activities with modest impairments in the mild stages and how these compare between Alzheimer's disease (AD), vascular dementia (VaD) and mixed dementia. METHODS: Staff from memory assessment services from nine National Health Service trusts across England identified and approached informal carers of people with mild dementia. Carers completed the newly revised Interview for Deteriorations in Daily Living Activities in Dementia 2 assessing the PwD's initiative and performance of instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs). Data were analysed using analysis of variance and Chi-square tests to compare the maintenance of IADL functioning across AD, VaD, and mixed dementia. RESULTS: A total of 160 carers returned the Interview for Deteriorations in Daily Living Activities in Dementia 2, of which 109, 21, and 30 cared for someone with AD, VaD, and mixed dementia, respectively. There were significant variations across subtypes, with AD showing better preserved initiative and performance than VaD for several IADLs. Overall, PwD showed greater preservation of performance than initiative, with tasks such as preparing a hot drink and dressing being best maintained. CONCLUSION: Findings can help classify dementia better into subtypes in order to receive bespoke support. It suggests that interventions should primarily address initiative to improve overall functioning. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cost-effectiveness of donepezil and memantine in moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease (the DOMINO-AD trial).

OBJECTIVE: Most investigations of pharmacotherapy for treating Alzheimer's disease focus on patients with mild-to-moderate symptoms, with little evidence to guide clinical decisions when symptoms become severe. We examined whether continuing donepezil, or commencing memantine, is cost-effective for community-dwelling, moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease patients. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis was based on a 52-week, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, factorial clinical trial. A total of 295 community-dwelling patients with moderate/severe Alzheimer's disease, already treated with donepezil, were randomised to: (i) continue donepezil; (ii) discontinue donepezil; (iii) discontinue donepezil and start memantine; or (iv) continue donepezil and start memantine. RESULTS: Continuing donepezil for 52 weeks was more cost-effective than discontinuation, considering cognition, activities of daily living and health-related quality of life. Starting memantine was more cost-effective than donepezil discontinuation. Donepezil-memantine combined is not more cost-effective than donepezil alone. CONCLUSIONS: Robust evidence is now available to inform clinical decisions and commissioning strategies so as to improve patients' lives whilst making efficient use of available resources. Clinical guidelines for treating moderate/severe Alzheimer's disease, such as those issued by NICE in England and Wales, should be revisited. © 2016 The Authors. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Patients' and carers' experiences of UK memory services.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to test the validity of an accreditation programme for memory services in the UK by investigating whether different levels of accreditation status (excellent compared with accredited) are reflected in patients' and carers' reported satisfaction. METHOD: A comparison of survey data from patient and carer feedback questionnaires collected from services as part of the accreditation process. RESULTS: Five hundred and eighty-three patient questionnaires and 663 carer questionnaires were returned from 41 services. Patients and carers who attended memory services which were later 'accredited as excellent', were more likely than those who had visited 'accredited' services to have: been given written information about a variety of topics; been asked for feedback about using the memory service; and had found it easier to get to their appointments. Carers attending services accredited as excellent were more likely to have been offered an assessment of their needs. CONCLUSION: Patients and carers had very good experiences of memory services overall whether they had standard or excellent accreditation. However, 'excellent' services were consistently better on a number of factors. This provides further support that the accreditation process is an important indicator of the quality of memory services.