Use of a digital tool to support the diagnostic process in memory clinics-a usability study.

BACKGROUND: Both memory clinic professionals and patients see value in digital tools, yet these hardly find their way to clinical practice. We explored the usability of a digital tool to support the diagnostic work-up in daily memory clinic practice. We evaluated four modules that integrate multi-modal patient data (1.cognitive test; cCOG, and 2. MRI quantification; cMRI) into useful diagnostic information for clinicians (3. cDSI) and understandable and personalized information for patients (4. patient report). METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study in five Dutch memory clinics. Fourteen clinicians (11 geriatric specialists/residents, two neurologists, one nurse practitioner) were invited to integrate the tool into routine care with 43 new memory clinic patients. We evaluated usability and user experiences through quantitative data from questionnaires (patients, care partners, clinicians), enriched with thematically analyzed qualitative data from interviews (clinicians). RESULTS: We observed wide variation in tool use among clinicians. Our core findings were that clinicians: 1) were mainly positive about the patient report, since it contributes to patient-centered and personalized communication. This was endorsed by patients and care partners, who indicated that the patient report was useful and understandable and helped them to better understand their diagnosis, 2) considered the tool acceptable in addition to their own clinical competence, 3) indicated that the usefulness of the tool depended on the patient population and purpose of the diagnostic process, 4) addressed facilitators (ease of use, practice makes perfect) and barriers (high workload, lack of experience, data unavailability). CONCLUSION: This multicenter usability study revealed a willingness to adopt a digital tool to support the diagnostic process in memory clinics. Clinicians, patients, and care partners appreciated the personalized diagnostic report. More attention to education and training of clinicians is needed to utilize the full functionality of the tool and foster implementation in actual daily practice. These findings provide an important step towards a lasting adoption of digital tools in memory clinic practice.

Young-onset dementia in memory clinics in the Netherlands: Study design and description of PRECODE-GP.

The disease trajectory and healthcare requirements of patients with young-onset dementia (YOD) differ from those of older patients. Accurate data about YOD is crucial to improve diagnosis and optimize care. PRECODE-GP aims to set up a prospective national database of patients with YOD to gain insight into the occurrence and characteristics of patients with YOD in memory clinics in the Netherlands. The national database includes data from dementia patients aged <70 years at diagnosis, collected by local memory clinics (MCs). Data included demographic information, clinical variables, and (etiological) diagnoses. Between July 2019 and December 2022, 781 patients with a mean age of 62±6y at diagnosis (range 37 to 69y) were included from 39 MCs. Most (n = 547,70%) were diagnosed with dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (AD). Patients with Frontotemporal lobe dementia (FTD, n = 87, 11%) were youngest (61±6.0y). Over half (55%) of patients were experiencing symptoms for ≥2 years. We initiated a Dutch national YOD database to improve diagnosis and care for this underrepresented and vulnerable patient group. The database provides a basis for future in-depth studies on YOD.

Optimizing cCOG, a Web-based tool, to detect dementia with Lewy Bodies.

Introduction: Distinguishing dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) from Alzheimer's disease (AD) is challenging due to overlapping presentations. We adapted a Web-based test tool, cCOG, by adding a visuospatial task and a brief clinical survey and assessed its ability to differentiate between DLB and AD. Methods: We included 110 patients (n = 30 DLB, n = 32 AD dementia, and n = 48 controls with subjective cognitive decline (SCD)). Full cCOG comprises six cognitive subtasks and a survey addressing self-reported DLB core and autonomic features. First, we compared cCOG cognitive tasks to traditional neuropsychological tasks for all diagnostic groups and clinical questions to validated assessments of clinical features in DLB only. Then, we studied the performance of cCOG cognitive tasks and clinical questions, separately and combined, in differentiating diagnostic groups. Results: cCOG cognitive tasks and clinical survey had moderate to strong correlations to standard neuropsychological testing (.61≤ r s ≤ .77) and to validated assessments of clinical features (.41≤ r s ≤ .65), except for fluctuations and REM-sleep behavior disorder (RBD) (r s = .32 and r s = .10). Full cCOG, including both cognitive tasks and brief survey had a diagnostic accuracy (acc) of 0.82 [95% CI 0.73-0.89], with good discrimination of DLB versus AD (acc 0.87 [0.76-0.95]) and DLB versus controls (acc 0.94 [0.86-0.98]). Conclusion: We illustrated that cCOG aids in distinguishing DLB and AD patients by using remote assessment of cognition and clinical features. Our findings pave the way to a funneled, harmonized diagnostic process among memory clinics and, eventually, a more timely and accurate diagnosis of DLB and AD.