Traumatic life events and risk for dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the association between traumatic life events (TLE) and dementia risk. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: APA, PsychINFO, Embase and MEDLINE from their inception to 29.05.21 and updated on 20.04.22. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Original research articles published in peer reviewed journals examining the association between TLE and all cause dementia in individuals aged 60 and over. Two researchers independently assessed the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We conducted a generic inverse variance random effects meta-analysis to provide an overall estimate of TLE impact on dementia risk. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk, odds and hazards ratios relating to dementia risk. RESULTS: Initially, 3,487 studies were retrieved in the search and seven studies were included in the meta-analysis with data being used from 276,570 participants. TLE were associated with increased dementia risk. Trauma in general had a pooled HR of 1.21, (95% CI 1.03, 1.43, P = 0.0001). War/ Holocaust trauma and childhood trauma were also associated with increased dementia risk (HR = 1.28 (95% CI 1.01-1.63, P = 0.02) and HR = 1.76 (95% CI 1.17-2.64, P = 0.007) respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We have found an association between TLE and dementia risk. Future research exploring the dimensions of TLE and individual level factors are needed to better understand the relationship between TLE and dementia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021253090.

Equity in care and support provision for people affected by dementia: experiences of people from UK South Asian and White British backgrounds.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the care and support received and wanted by United Kingdom (UK) South Asian and White British people affected by dementia and whether access to it is equitable. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews using a topic guide. SETTING: Eight memory clinics across four UK National Health Service Trusts; three in London and one in Leicester. PARTICIPANTS: We purposefully recruited a maximum variation sample of people living with dementia from South Asian or White British backgrounds, their family carers, and memory clinic clinicians. We interviewed 62 participants including 13 people living with dementia, 24 family carers, and 25 clinicians. MEASUREMENTS: We audio-recorded interviews, transcribed them, and analyzed them using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: People from either background were willing to accept needed care and wanted competence and communication from carers. South Asian people frequently discussed needing care from someone with a shared language, but language differences could also be an issue for White British people. Some clinicians thought South Asian people had a stronger preference to provide care within the family. We found that preferences for who provides care varied across families regardless of ethnicity. Those with more financial resources and English language have more options for care that meets their needs. CONCLUSIONS: People of the same background make differing choices about care. Equitable access to care is impacted by people's personal resources, and people from South Asian backgrounds may experience the double disadvantage of having fewer options for care that meets their needs and fewer resources to seek care elsewhere.

Tailoring STrAtegies for RelaTives for Black and South Asian dementia family carers in the United Kingdom: A mixed methods study.

OBJECTIVES: We culturally adapted STrAtegies for RelaTives (START), a clinically and cost-effective intervention for dementia family carers, for Black and South Asian families. It had previously been delivered to family carers around the time of diagnosis, when most people with dementia had very mild, mild or moderate dementia. METHODS: We interviewed a maximum variation sample of family carers (phase one; n = 15 South Asian; n = 11 Black) about what aspect of START, required cultural adaptation, then analysed it thematically using the Cultural Treatment Adaptation Framework then adapted it in English and into Urdu. Facilitators then delivered START individually to carers (phase two; n = 13 South Asian; n = 8 Black). We assessed acceptability and feasibility through the number of sessions attended, score for fidelity to the intervention and interviewing family carers about their experiences. We used the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. to examine whether immediate changes in family carers' mental health were in line with previous studies. RESULTS: In phase one we made adaptations to peripheral elements of START, clarifying language, increasing illustrative vignettes numbers, emphasising privacy and the facilitator's cultural competence and making images ethnically diverse. In phase two 21 family carers consented to receive the adapted intervention; 12 completed ≥5/8 sessions; four completed fewer sessions and five never started. Baseline HADS score (n = 21) was 14.4 (SD = 9.8) but for those who we were able to follow up was 12.3 (SD 8.1) and immediately post-intervention was 11.3 (n = 10; SD = 6.1). Family carers were positive about the adapted START and continued to use elements after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Culturally adapted START was acceptable and feasible in South Asian and Black UK-based family carers and changes in mental health were in line with those in the original clinical trial. Our study shows that culturally inclusive START was also acceptable. Changes made in adaptations were relevant to all populations. We now use the adapted version for all family carers irrespective of ethnicity.

Understanding the subjective experiences of memory concern and MCI diagnosis: A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Many older people experience memory concerns; a minority receive a diagnosis of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) or Subjective Cognitive decline (SCD). There are concerns that medicalisation of MCI and memory concern may fail to acknowledge subjective experiences. AIM: We explore the meaning individuals give to their memory concerns, with or without a diagnosis of MCI and SCD. METHOD: We scoped literature exploring subjective experiences of memory concern, with or without a diagnosis of MCI or SCD. We searched CINAHL, PsycINFO and MEDLINE in March 2020, and updated in Sept 2021.We used (Arksey & O'Malley, 2005) framework to guide our scoping review method and thematic analysis to analyse our findings. RESULTS: We screened 12,033 search results reviewing the full texts of 92 papers. We included 24 papers, including a total of 453 participants, the majority of whom were female, from White ethnic majority populations (or from studies where ethnicity was not identified) with high levels of education. In 15 out of 24 studies, 272 participants were diagnosed with MCI. We identified two themes; Making a diagnosis personal and Remembering not to forget. We found that subjective experiences include normative comparison with others of the same age and responses including fear, relief, and acceptance, but culminating in uncertainty. CONCLUSION: Drawing upon sociology, we highlight the subjective experiences of living with memory concerns, SCD and an MCI diagnosis. We identify a gap between the intended purpose of diagnostic labels to bring understanding and certainty and the lived experiences of those ascribed them.

Experience of UK Latin Americans caring for a relative living with dementia: A qualitative study of family carers.

INTRODUCTION: Most studies of the Latin American immigrant experience and care for relatives living with dementia have been in the United States (US). In the United Kingdom (UK), unlike the US, most Latin Americans are first generation immigrants and are a rapidly increasing population. Therefore, we aimed to explore the UK experiences of Latin Americans caring for a relative with dementia. METHODS: We purposively recruited UK-based Latin American family carers of people with dementia ensuring maximum diversity. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews (in English or Spanish) with 11 family carers, stopping recruiting when we reached thematic saturation. We took an inductive thematic analytic approach. FINDINGS: Four main themes were identified: (1) Family comes first, particularly older people, leading to an obligation to care; (2) dementia as an illness that is accepted and talked about, which is regarded as positive with close networks but not wider society; (3) difficult behaviours are not the responsibility of the person with dementia, who is often conceptualised as a child; and (4) caring expectations lead to incompatibility with formal services, and a reluctance to leave people with dementia alone. CONCLUSIONS: Familial obligation is the driver for family carers and acceptance of the illness helped despite adversities. Openness to talk about dementia with close networks was distinctive and helpful, contrasting with wider society, where greater awareness of dementia is needed. Considering the person with dementia as a child did not seem to undermine personhood and enabled maintenance of compassion. The relative with dementia was a priority. There was a lack of culturally and linguistically appropriate services, thus restricting family carers' ability to fulfil other roles, such as parental.

Protection against discrimination in national dementia guideline recommendations: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: National dementia guidelines provide recommendations about the most effective approaches to diagnosis and interventions. Guidelines can improve care, but some groups such as people with minority characteristics may be disadvantaged if recommended approaches are the same for everyone. It is not known if dementia guidelines address specific needs related to patient characteristics. The objectives of this review are to identify which countries have national guidelines for dementia and synthesise recommendations relating to protected characteristics, as defined in the UK Equality Act 2010: age, disability, gender identity, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Medline databases and the Guideline International Network library from inception to March 4, 2020, for dementia guidelines in any language. We also searched, between April and September 2020, Google and the national health websites of all 196 countries in English and in each country's official languages. To be included, guidelines had to provide recommendations about dementia, which were expected to be followed by healthcare workers and be approved at a national policy level. We rated quality according to the iCAHE guideline quality checklist. We provide a narrative synthesis of recommendations identified for each protected characteristic, prioritising those from higher-quality guidelines. Forty-six guidelines from 44 countries met our criteria, of which 18 were rated as higher quality. Most guidelines (39/46; 85%) made at least one reference to protected characteristics, and we identified recommendations relating to age, disability, race (or culture, ethnicity, or language), religion, sex, and sexual orientation. Age was the most frequently referenced characteristic (31/46; 67%) followed by race (or culture, ethnicity, or language; 25/46; 54%). Recommendations included specialist investigation and support for younger people affected by dementia and consideration of culture when assessing whether someone had dementia and providing person-centred care. Guidelines recommended considering religion when providing person-centred and end-of-life care. For disability, it was recommended that healthcare workers consider intellectual disability and sensory impairment when assessing for dementia. Most recommendations related to sex recommended not using sex hormones to treat cognitive impairment in men and women. One guideline made one recommendation related to sexual orientation. The main limitation of this study is that we only included national guidelines applicable to a whole country meaning guidelines from countries with differing healthcare systems within the country may have been excluded. CONCLUSIONS: National guidelines for dementia vary in their consideration of protected characteristics. We found that around a fifth of the world's countries have guidelines for dementia. We have identified areas of good practice that can be considered for future guidelines and suggest that all guidelines provide specific evidence-based recommendations for minority groups with examples of how to implement them. This will promote equity in the care of people affected by dementia and help to ensure that people with protected characteristics also have high-quality clinical services.

Culturally tailored therapeutic interventions for people affected by dementia: a systematic review and new conceptual model.

Most people with dementia live in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) and there is an increased dementia prevalence in some minority ethnic groups in high-income countries. However, most interventions are devised for majority populations in high-income countries. We systematically searched 11 electronic databases for culturally tailored interventions for people with dementia and their family carers in LMICs and minority ethnic groups, without limit on language or date. 23 of 22 221 studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. Interventions adapted peripheral intervention components by, for example, translation and reducing the stigma of psychological therapy by emphasising physical illness and learning. Core therapeutic components were not changed. We found evidence-based, multicomponent interventions adapted for Latinx carers were acceptable, feasible, and effective in the USA and Columbia. Interventions developed for carers in India were effective there but not in other LMICs. Culturally adapted cognitive stimulation therapy was acceptable and effective for people with dementia in sub-Saharan Africa. We propose a new conceptual model from our findings to aid implementation of culturally appropriate treatments for people affected by dementia in LMICs and minority ethnic groups. Evidence-based interventions need cultural adaptation for different settings with therapeutic components retained. If they are acceptable, feasible, and remain effective then full effectiveness trials are unnecessary.