The Effect of Temporal Persistence of Loneliness on Dementia: A Longitudinal Analysis From the Hunter Community Study.

OBJECTIVES: Loneliness is common and becoming a public health concern. Although there is the clear evidence of the variable effect of temporal differences in loneliness (transient/situational and persistent/chronic) on health, their effect on dementia risk is unclear. This study aims to assess the effect of transient/situational and persistent/chronic loneliness on dementia risk. METHOD: Participants aged 55 years and older from the Hunter Community Study were recruited. Loneliness was measured using a single item measure. Dementia was defined as per International Classification of Disease-10 (ICD 10) codes. The Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model was performed to calculate dementia risk. RESULTS: Of 1968 total participants with mean age of 66 years, (3%) 57 developed dementia and (7%) 135 died over the mean follow up of 10 years. Both persistent/chronic and transient/situational loneliness significantly increased the risk of all cause dementia in adjusted models (HR 2.74, 95% CI 1.11-6.88, p 0.03 and HR 2.35, 95% CI 1.21-4.55, p 0.01 respectively) with mean time to event of 9.7 years. Feeling lonely below the age of 70 years elevated the risk of dementia in later life (HR 4.01, 95% CI 1.40-11.50, p 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Loneliness (both persistent/chronic and transient/situational) was associated with increased risk of all cause dementia, especially if loneliness was experienced before the age of 70 years. These results suggest that promoting coping strategies for loneliness especially in persons 70 years and younger may play a role in preventing dementia.

General practitioner and practice nurses perspectives on implementation of the 75+ health assessment: Implications for dementia care and well-being.

BACKGROUND: The uptake of the health assessment for persons aged 75 years and older (75 + HA) remains low. Repeat assessments provide an opportunity to identify areas of change in cognitive function which may mark the onset of dementia. We aimed to explore general practitioner (GP) and practice nurse experiences of implementing the 75 + HA with a focus on clinical considerations for dementia care. METHODS: An interpretative qualitative study involving interviews with 15 GPs (female = 11, male = 4) and 5 practice nurses (all female). Data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach. RESULTS: The majority of GPs (n = 11) worked in metropolitan settings and four GPs worked in regional settings across NSW. All participants worked in separate clinics, except for two GPs and one practice nurse who worked within the same metropolitan clinic. Distinct themes emerged regarding participants experiences of implementing the 75 + HA for patients with dementia: (1) negotiating aged care is complex and facilitated by a comprehensive assessment; (2) implementing work practices that support the 75 + HA in patients with cognitive decline; and (3) variations in follow up of findings and implications for care. DISCUSSION: The 75 + HA provides an opportunity for monitoring and acting on emergent physical and cognitive health changes. Increased engagement and support towards implementing the 75 + HA, particularly in the context of dementia, may facilitate the instigation of interventions. While some participants in this study were confident with identifying and managing cognitive decline, the majority relied on geriatricians to confirm dementia diagnosis and refer to community support services. We suggest the need for greater initiatives and clinical guidelines to assist GPs in the identification and management of cognitive decline. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION: From a nursing perspective, this study highlights the valuable role of nurses towards assessment and management of issues raised in the health assessment for persons aged 75 years and older. However, more resources are needed to enable nurse time for adequate follow-up care.

The effect of anxiety on all-cause dementia: A longitudinal analysis from the Hunter Community Study.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety is common, however, the effect of chronicity of anxiety on dementia has not been explored. This study aims to assess the longitudinal relationship between chronic versus resolved versus new onset anxiety, and all-cause dementia risk. METHODS: A total of 2132 participants with mean age 76 years from the Hunter Community Study were recruited. Anxiety was measured using Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10). Dementia was defined as per International Classification of Disease-10 codes. The Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model was computed to assess dementia risk, while adjusting for the competing risk of death. RESULTS: Chronic anxiety and new onset anxiety at follow-up were associated with all-cause dementia risk (HR 2.80, 95% CI 1.35-5.72 and HR 3.20, 95% CI 1.40-7.45 respectively) with an average time to dementia diagnosis of 10 years (SD = 1.7) whereas resolved anxiety was not. In subgroup analyses, these results were driven particularly by chronic and new anxiety among participants below the age of 70 years (HR 4.58, 95% CI 01.12-18.81 and HR 7.21, 95%CI 1.86-28.02 respectively). Sensitivity analyses imputing missing data and addressing reverse causation gave very similar results. CONCLUSION: Chronic and new anxiety were associated with increased risk of all-cause dementia, and this association was significant in those 70 years and younger. However, the resolved anxiety at follow-up reduced the risk, similar to that of the non-exposed group. These results suggest that timely management of anxiety may be a viable strategy in reducing the risk of dementia.

Melatonin for delirium prevention in hospitalized patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Melatonin, a pineal gland hormone is reported to have a protective effect against delirium. This systematic review and meta-analysis explores the effect of melatonin and melatonin receptor agonist, ramelteon on delirium prevention in adult hospitalized patients. METHODS: Randomized Controlled trials of melatonin/ramelteon published up to May 7, 2020 were identified from MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, PubMed, and Google Scholar. The primary outcome was delirium incidence. The secondary outcomes were sleep quality, sedation score, sedatives requirement, delirium duration, length of hospital stay, length of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stay, mortality and adverse events. A meta-analysis with a random-effects models was performed. Estimates were presented as Risk Ratio (RR) or Mean Differences (MD) with 95% Confidence Interval (CI). FINDINGS: Fourteen studies with 1712 participants were included. Melatonin/ramelteon significantly reduced delirium incidence (RR 0·61, 95% CI 0·42-0·89, p 0·009) with risk reduction of 49% in surgical patients and 34% in ICU patients. Non-significant reduction was found in medical patients. Melatonin/ramelteon were associated with improvement in sleep quality, increased sedation score and lower sedatives consumption. However, they did not reduce delirium duration, length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay and mortality. Hallucinations, nightmares and gastrointestinal disorders were prevalent in melatonin group. INTERPRETATION: Melatonin/ramelteon are associated with reduction in delirium incidence in hospitalized patients. However, this effect seems confined to surgical and ICU patients. The optimum dosage and formulation of melatonin, and treatment duration remain uncleared and open to further studies with larger sample sizes.