-
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Mar 2021To describe the comparative efficacy of drug and non-drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia who experience depression as a... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To describe the comparative efficacy of drug and non-drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia who experience depression as a neuropsychiatric symptom of dementia or have a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and grey literature between inception and 15 October 2020.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION
Randomised trials comparing drug or non-drug interventions with usual care or any other intervention targeting symptoms of depression in people with dementia.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Pairs of reviewers screened studies, abstracted aggregate level data, and appraised risk of bias with the Cochrane risk of bias tool, which facilitated the derivation of standardised mean differences and back transformed mean differences (on the Cornell scale for depression in dementia) from bayesian random effects network meta-analyses and pairwise meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Of 22 138 citations screened, 256 studies (28 483 people with dementia) were included. Missing data posed the greatest risk to review findings. In the network meta-analysis of studies including people with dementia without a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder who were experiencing symptoms of depression (213 studies; 25 177 people with dementia; between study variance 0.23), seven interventions were associated with a greater reduction in symptoms of depression compared with usual care: cognitive stimulation (mean difference -2.93, 95% credible interval -4.35 to -1.52), cognitive stimulation combined with a cholinesterase inhibitor (-11.39, -18.38 to -3.93), massage and touch therapy (-9.03, -12.28 to -5.88), multidisciplinary care (-1.98, -3.80 to -0.16), occupational therapy (-2.59, -4.70 to -0.40), exercise combined with social interaction and cognitive stimulation (-12.37, -19.01 to -5.36), and reminiscence therapy (-2.30, -3.68 to -0.93). Except for massage and touch therapy, cognitive stimulation combined with a cholinesterase inhibitor, and cognitive stimulation combined with exercise and social interaction, which were more efficacious than some drug interventions, no statistically significant difference was found in the comparative efficacy of drug and non-drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia without a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity precluded network meta-analysis of studies comparing the efficacy of interventions specifically for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia and a major depressive disorder (22 studies; 1829 patients).
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, non-drug interventions were found to be more efficacious than drug interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in people with dementia without a major depressive disorder.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42017050130.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Combined Modality Therapy; Dementia; Depression; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Social Support; Therapy, Soft Tissue
PubMed: 33762262
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n532 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2022Experiencing anxiety and depression is very common in people living with dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). There is uncertainty about the best treatment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Experiencing anxiety and depression is very common in people living with dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). There is uncertainty about the best treatment approach. Drug treatments may be ineffective and associated with adverse effects. Guidelines recommend psychological treatments. In this updated systematic review, we investigated the effectiveness of different psychological treatment approaches.
OBJECTIVES
Primary objective To assess the clinical effectiveness of psychological interventions in reducing depression and anxiety in people with dementia or MCI. Secondary objectives To determine whether psychological interventions improve individuals' quality of life, cognition, activities of daily living (ADL), and reduce behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia, and whether they improve caregiver quality of life or reduce caregiver burden.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's register, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases, and three trials registers on 18 February 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a psychological intervention for depression or anxiety with treatment as usual (TAU) or another control intervention in people with dementia or MCI.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
A minimum of two authors worked independently to select trials, extract data, and assess studies for risk of bias. We classified the included psychological interventions as cognitive behavioural therapies (cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), behavioural activation (BA), problem-solving therapy (PST)); 'third-wave' therapies (such as mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT)); supportive and counselling therapies; and interpersonal therapies. We compared each class of intervention with control. We expressed treatment effects as standardised mean differences or risk ratios. Where possible, we pooled data using a fixed-effects model. We used GRADE methods to assess the certainty of the evidence behind each result.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 29 studies with 2599 participants. They were all published between 1997 and 2020. There were 15 trials of cognitive behavioural therapies (4 CBT, 8 BA, 3 PST), 11 trials of supportive and counselling therapies, three trials of MBCT, and one of interpersonal therapy. The comparison groups received either usual care, attention-control education, or enhanced usual care incorporating an active control condition that was not a specific psychological treatment. There were 24 trials of people with a diagnosis of dementia, and five trials of people with MCI. Most studies were conducted in community settings. We considered none of the studies to be at low risk of bias in all domains. Cognitive behavioural therapies (CBT, BA, PST) Cognitive behavioural therapies are probably slightly better than treatment as usual or active control conditions for reducing depressive symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.23, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.10; 13 trials, 893 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). They may also increase rates of depression remission at the end of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.84, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.88; 2 studies, with one study contributing 2 independent comparisons, 146 participants; low-certainty evidence). We were very uncertain about the effect of cognitive behavioural therapies on anxiety at the end of treatment (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.30; 3 trials, 143 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Cognitive behavioural therapies probably improve patient quality of life (SMD 0.31, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.50; 7 trials, 459 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and activities of daily living at end of treatment compared to treatment as usual or active control (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.09; 7 trials, 680 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Supportive and counselling interventions Meta-analysis showed that supportive and counselling interventions may have little or no effect on depressive symptoms in people with dementia compared to usual care at end of treatment (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.07; 9 trials, 994 participants; low-certainty evidence). We were very uncertain about the effects of these treatments on anxiety, which was assessed only in one small pilot study. Other interventions There were very few data and very low-certainty evidence on MBCT and interpersonal therapy, so we were unable to draw any conclusions about the effectiveness of these interventions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
CBT-based treatments added to usual care probably slightly reduce symptoms of depression for people with dementia and MCI and may increase rates of remission of depression. There may be important effect modifiers (degree of baseline depression, cognitive diagnosis, or content of the intervention). CBT-based treatments probably also have a small positive effect on quality of life and activities of daily living. Supportive and counselling interventions may not improve symptoms of depression in people with dementia. Effects of both types of treatment on anxiety symptoms are very uncertain. We are also uncertain about the effects of other types of psychological treatments, and about persistence of effects over time. To inform clinical guidelines, future studies should assess detailed components of these interventions and their implementation in different patient populations and in different settings.
Topics: Anxiety; Anxiety Disorders; Cognitive Dysfunction; Dementia; Depression; Humans; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35466396
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009125.pub3 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Apr 2023To investigate the role of air pollutants in risk of dementia, considering differences by study factors that could influence findings. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the role of air pollutants in risk of dementia, considering differences by study factors that could influence findings.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, Psycinfo, and OVID Medline from database inception through July 2022.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Studies that included adults (≥18 years), a longitudinal follow-up, considered US Environmental Protection Agency criteria air pollutants and proxies of traffic pollution, averaged exposure over a year or more, and reported associations between ambient pollutants and clinical dementia. Two authors independently extracted data using a predefined data extraction form and assessed risk of bias using the Risk of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Exposures (ROBINS-E) tool. A meta-analysis with Knapp-Hartung standard errors was done when at least three studies for a given pollutant used comparable approaches.
RESULTS
2080 records identified 51 studies for inclusion. Most studies were at high risk of bias, although in many cases bias was towards the null. 14 studies could be meta-analysed for particulate matter <2.5 µm in diameter (PM). The overall hazard ratio per 2 μg/m PM was 1.04 (95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.09). The hazard ratio among seven studies that used active case ascertainment was 1.42 (1.00 to 2.02) and among seven studies that used passive case ascertainment was 1.03 (0.98 to 1.07). The overall hazard ratio per 10 μg/m nitrogen dioxide was 1.02 ((0.98 to 1.06); nine studies) and per 10 μg/m nitrogen oxide was 1.05 ((0.98 to 1.13); five studies). Ozone had no clear association with dementia (hazard ratio per 5 μg/m was 1.00 (0.98 to 1.05); four studies).
CONCLUSION
PM might be a risk factor for dementia, as well as nitrogen dioxide and nitrogen oxide, although with more limited data. The meta-analysed hazard ratios are subject to limitations that require interpretation with caution. Outcome ascertainment approaches differ across studies and each exposure assessment approach likely is only a proxy for causally relevant exposure in relation to clinical dementia outcomes. Studies that evaluate critical periods of exposure and pollutants other than PM, and studies that actively assess all participants for outcomes are needed. Nonetheless, our results can provide current best estimates for use in burden of disease and regulatory setting efforts.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42021277083.
Topics: Humans; Air Pollutants; Air Pollution; Dementia; Environmental Exposure
PubMed: 37019461
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2022-071620 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2020Medications licensed for the treatment of dementia have limited efficacy against cognitive impairment or against the distressed behaviours (behavioural and psychological... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Medications licensed for the treatment of dementia have limited efficacy against cognitive impairment or against the distressed behaviours (behavioural and psychological symptoms, or behaviour that challenges) which are also often the most distressing aspect of the disorder for caregivers. Complementary therapies, including aromatherapy, are attractive to patients, practitioners and families, because they are perceived as being unlikely to cause adverse effects. Therefore there is interest in whether aromatherapy might offer a safe means of alleviating distressed behaviours in dementia.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of aromatherapy for people with dementia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group Specialized Register, on 5 May 2020 using the terms: aromatherapy, lemon, lavender, rose, aroma, alternative therapies, complementary therapies, essential oils. In addition, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO (all via Ovid SP), Web of Science Core Collection (via Thompson Web of Science), LILACS (via BIREME), CENTRAL (via the Cochrane Library), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal (ICTRP) on 5 May 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials which compared fragrance from plants in an intervention defined as aromatherapy for people with dementia with placebo aromatherapy or with treatment as usual. All doses, frequencies and fragrances of aromatherapy were considered. Participants in the included studies had a diagnosis of dementia of any subtype and severity.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias in included studies, involving other authors to reach consensus decisions where necessary. We did not perform any meta-analyses because of heterogeneity between studies, but presented a narrative synthesis of results from the included trials. Because of the heterogeneity of analysis methods and inadequate or absent reporting of data from some trials, we used statistical significance (P ≤ or > 0.5) as a summary metric when synthesising results across studies. As far as possible, we used GRADE methods to assess our confidence in the results of the trials, downgrading for risk of bias and imprecision.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 studies with 708 participants. All participants had dementia and in the 12 trials which described the setting, all were resident in institutional care facilities. Nine trials recruited participants because they had significant agitation or other behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia (BPSD) at baseline. The fragrances used were lavender (eight studies); lemon balm (four studies); lavender and lemon balm, lavender and orange, and cedar extracts (one study each). For six trials, assessment of risk of bias and extraction of results was hampered by poor reporting. Four of the other seven trials were at low risk of bias in all domains, but all were small (range 18 to 186 participants; median 66), reducing our confidence in the results. Our primary outcomes were agitation, overall behavioural and psychological symptoms, and adverse effects. Ten trials assessed agitation using various scales. Among the five trials for which our confidence in the results was moderate or low, four trials reported no significant effect on agitation and one trial reported a significant benefit of aromatherapy. The other five trials either reported no useable data or our confidence in the results was very low. Eight trials assessed overall BPSD using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory and we had moderate or low confidence in the results of five of them. Of these, four reported significant benefit from aromatherapy and one reported no significant effect. Adverse events were poorly reported or not reported at all in most trials. No more than two trials assessed each of our secondary outcomes of quality of life, mood, sleep, activities of daily living, caregiver burden. We did not find evidence of benefit on these outcomes. Three trials assessed cognition: one did not report any data and the other two trials reported no significant effect of aromatherapy on cognition. Our confidence in the results of these studies was low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We have not found any convincing evidence that aromatherapy (or exposure to fragrant plant oils) is beneficial for people with dementia although there are many limitations to the data. Conduct or reporting problems in half of the included studies meant that they could not contribute to the conclusions. Results from the other studies were inconsistent. Harms were very poorly reported in the included studies. In order for clear conclusions to be drawn, better design and reporting and consistency of outcome measurement in future trials would be needed.
Topics: Aromatherapy; Behavioral Symptoms; Bias; Dementia; Humans; Oils, Volatile; Psychomotor Agitation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32813272
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003150.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2021The balance of benefits and harms associated with enteral tube feeding for people with severe dementia is not clear. An increasing number of guidelines highlight the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The balance of benefits and harms associated with enteral tube feeding for people with severe dementia is not clear. An increasing number of guidelines highlight the lack of evidenced benefit and potential risks of enteral tube feeding. In some areas of the world, the use of enteral tube feeding is decreasing, and in other areas it is increasing.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of enteral tube feeding for people with severe dementia who develop problems with eating and swallowing or who have reduced food and fluid intake.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's register, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases and two trials registers on 14 April 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), or controlled non-randomised studies. Our population of interest was adults of any age with a diagnosis of primary degenerative dementia of any cause, with severe cognitive and functional impairment, and poor nutritional intake. Eligible studies evaluated the effectiveness and complications of enteral tube feeding via a nasogastric or gastrostomy tube, or via jejunal post-pyloric feeding, in comparison with standard care or enhanced standard care, such as an intervention to promote oral intake. Our primary outcomes were survival time, quality of life, and pressure ulcers.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors screened citations and two review authors assessed full texts of potentially eligible studies against inclusion criteria. One review author extracted data, which were then checked independently by a second review author. We used the 'Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions' (ROBINS-I) tool to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. Risk of confounding was assessed against a pre-agreed list of key potential confounding variables. Our primary outcomes were survival time, quality of life, and pressure ulcers. Results were not suitable for meta-analysis, so we presented them narratively. We presented results separately for studies of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding, nasogastric tube feeding and studies using mixed or unspecified enteral tube feeding methods. We used GRADE methods to assess the overall certainty of the evidence related to each outcome for each study.
MAIN RESULTS
We found no eligible RCTs. We included fourteen controlled, non-randomised studies. All the included studies compared outcomes between groups of people who had been assigned to enteral tube feeding or oral feeding by prior decision of a healthcare professional. Some studies controlled for a range of confounding factors, but there were high or very high risks of bias due to confounding in all studies, and high or critical risks of selection bias in some studies. Four studies with 36,816 participants assessed the effect of PEG feeding on survival time. None found any evidence of effects on survival time (low-certainty evidence). Three of four studies using mixed or unspecified enteral tube feeding methods in 310 participants (227 enteral tube feeding, 83 no enteral tube feeding) found them to be associated with longer survival time. The fourth study (1386 participants: 135 enteral tube feeding, 1251 no enteral tube feeding) found no evidence of an effect. The certainty of this body of evidence is very low. One study of PEG feeding (4421 participants: 1585 PEG, 2836 no enteral tube feeding) found PEG feeding increased the risk of pressure ulcers (moderate-certainty evidence). Two of three studies reported an increase in the number of pressure ulcers in those receiving mixed or unspecified enteral tube feeding (234 participants: 88 enteral tube feeding, 146 no enteral tube feeding). The third study found no effect (very-low certainty evidence). Two studies of nasogastric tube feeding did not report data on survival time or pressure ulcers. None of the included studies assessed quality of life. Only one study, using mixed methods of enteral tube feeding, reported on pain and comfort, finding no difference between groups. In the same study, a higher proportion of carers reported very heavy burden in the enteral tube feeding group compared to no enteral tube feeding. Two studies assessed the effect of nasogastric tube feeding on mortality (236 participants: 144 nasogastric group, 92 no enteral tube feeding). One study of 67 participants (14 nasogastric, 53 no enteral tube feeding) found nasogastric feeding was associated with increased mortality risk. The second study found no difference in mortality between groups. The certainty of this evidence is very low. Results on mortality for those using PEG or mixed methods of enteral tube feeding were mixed and the certainty of evidence was very low. There was some evidence from two studies for enteral tube feeding improving nutritional parameters, but this was very low-certainty evidence. Five studies reported a variety of harm-related outcomes with inconsistent results. The balance of evidence suggested increased risk of pneumonia with enteral tube feeding. None of the included studies assessed behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no evidence that tube feeding improves survival; improves quality of life; reduces pain; reduces mortality; decreases behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia; leads to better nourishment; improves family or carer outcomes such as depression, anxiety, carer burden, or satisfaction with care; and no indication of harm. We found some evidence that there is a clinically significant risk of pressure ulcers from enteral tube feeding. Future research should focus on better reporting and matching of control and intervention groups, and clearly defined interventions, measuring all the outcomes referred to here.
Topics: Adult; Caregivers; Dementia; Enteral Nutrition; Gastrostomy; Humans; Intubation, Gastrointestinal; Malnutrition; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34387363
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013503.pub2 -
Neuropsychology Review Jun 2021Cognitive reserve (CR) may reduce the risk of dementia. We summarized the effect of CR on progression to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia in studies... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Cognitive reserve (CR) may reduce the risk of dementia. We summarized the effect of CR on progression to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia in studies accounting for Alzheimer's disease (AD)-related structural pathology and biomarkers. Literature search was conducted in Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO. Relevant articles were longitudinal, in English, and investigating MCI or dementia incidence. Meta-analysis was conducted on nine articles, four measuring CR as cognitive residual of neuropathology and five as composite psychosocial proxies (e.g., education). High CR was related to a 47% reduced relative risk of MCI or dementia (pooled-hazard ratio: 0.53 [0.35, 0.81]), with residual-based CR reducing risk by 62% and proxy-based CR by 48%. CR protects against MCI and dementia progression above and beyond the effect of AD-related structural pathology and biomarkers. The finding that proxy-based measures of CR rivaled residual-based measures in terms of effect on dementia incidence underscores the importance of early- and mid-life factors in preventing dementia later.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Cognitive Dysfunction; Cognitive Reserve; Disease Progression; Humans
PubMed: 33415533
DOI: 10.1007/s11065-021-09478-4 -
BMJ Open Nov 2019To determine the effect of occupational therapy provided at home on activities of daily living, behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) and quality of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To determine the effect of occupational therapy provided at home on activities of daily living, behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) and quality of life (QOL) for people with dementia, and the effect on family carer burden, depression and QOL.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Eight databases were searched to February 2018. Randomised controlled trials of occupational therapy delivered at home for people with dementia and their family carers that measured ADL, and/or BPSD were included. Two independent reviewers determined eligibility, risk of bias and extracted data.
RESULTS
Fifteen trials were included (n=2063). Occupational therapy comprised multiple components (median=8 sessions). Compared with usual care or attention control occupational therapy resulted in improvements in the following outcomes for people with dementia: overall ADL after intervention (standardised means difference (SMD) 0.61, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.05); instrumental ADL alone (SMD 0.22, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.37; moderate quality); number of behavioural and psychological symptoms (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.08; moderate quality); and QOL (SMD 0.76, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.24) after the intervention and at follow-up (SMD 1.07, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.55). Carers reported less hours assisting the person with dementia (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.07); had less distress with behaviours (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.05; moderate quality) and improved QOL (SMD 0.99, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.33; moderate quality). Two studies compared occupational therapy with a comparison intervention and found no statistically significant results. GRADE ratings indicated evidence was very low to moderate quality.
CONCLUSIONS
Findings suggest that occupational therapy provided at home may improve a range of important outcomes for people with dementia and their family carers. Health professionals could consider referring them for occupational therapy.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42011001166.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Caregivers; Dementia; Humans; Occupational Therapy; Quality of Life
PubMed: 31719067
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026308 -
Journal of the American Geriatrics... Sep 2021To examine randomized controlled trials with active music-making interventions, in which older adults with probable mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To examine randomized controlled trials with active music-making interventions, in which older adults with probable mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia physically participate in music, and their effects on cognitive functioning, emotional well-being, and social engagement. Participating in music-making is engaging and has shown diverse benefits. Additionally, this review categorized the music activities of each intervention.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING
Long-term care facilities, day centers, specialty outpatient units, and community.
METHODS
Published randomized controlled trials of active music-making interventions to support older adults with probable MCI or dementia were identified (to March 15, 2021) using searches on Medline (Ovid), APA PsycInfo (Ovid), CINAHL (Ebsco), and Embase (Elsevier). The outcomes were cognitive functioning, emotional well-being, and social engagement, including self- and clinician-reported measures such as the Mini-Mental State Examination, Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, and the Beck Depression Inventory. Studies were critically appraised and studies with similar methodology were meta-analyzed.
PARTICIPANTS
Older adults with probable MCI and mild or moderate dementia.
RESULTS
A total of 21 studies with 1472 participants were analyzed for potential effect sizes and intervention activities. Of the 21 studies, nine studies recruiting a total of 495 participants were used to produce a random-effects meta-analytic model for cognitive functioning. Music showed a small, positive effect on cognitive functioning; the combined standard mean difference for the experimental and control group was 0.30 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10, 0.51). There was low study heterogeneity, with an I of 24% (p = 0.004). Individual studies for emotional well-being in terms of quality of life and mood showed positive effect sizes, d = 1.08 and d = 1.74, respectively. [Corrections added on July 8, 2021, after first online publication: The preceding sentences were revised from: "… control group was 0.31 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10,0.52). There was low study heterogeneity, with an I2 of 25% (p = 0.004)."] CONCLUSION: This review shows that music-making has a small but statistically significant effect on cognitive functioning for older adults with probable MCI or dementia. Future music interventions can benefit from rigorous intervention protocols that isolate specific activities.
Topics: Aged; Cognitive Dysfunction; Dementia; Humans; Music Therapy
PubMed: 34008208
DOI: 10.1111/jgs.17208 -
JAMA Neurology Feb 2023Hearing loss is associated with cognitive decline. However, it is unclear if hearing restorative devices may have a beneficial effect on cognition. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Hearing loss is associated with cognitive decline. However, it is unclear if hearing restorative devices may have a beneficial effect on cognition.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the associations of hearing aids and cochlear implants with cognitive decline and dementia.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for studies published from inception to July 23, 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials or observational studies published as full-length articles in peer-reviewed journals relating to the effect of hearing interventions on cognitive function, cognitive decline, cognitive impairment, and dementia in patients with hearing loss.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Two authors independently searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for studies relating to the effect of hearing interventions on cognitive decline and dementia in patients with hearing loss.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Maximally adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were used for dichotomous outcomes and ratio of means for continuous outcomes. Sources of heterogeneity were investigated using sensitivity and subgroup analyses, and publication bias was assessed using visual inspection, the Egger test, and trim and fill.
RESULTS
A total of 3243 studies were screened; 31 studies (25 observational studies, 6 trials) with 137 484 participants were included, of which 19 (15 observational studies, 4 trials) were included in quantitative analyses. Meta-analysis of 8 studies, which had 126 903 participants, had a follow-up duration ranging from 2 to 25 years, and studied long-term associations between hearing aid use and cognitive decline, showed significantly lower hazards of any cognitive decline among hearing aid users compared with participants with uncorrected hearing loss (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.76-0.87; I2 = 0%). Additionally, meta-analysis of 11 studies with 568 participants studying the association between hearing restoration and short-term cognitive test score changes revealed a 3% improvement in short-term cognitive test scores after the use of hearing aids (ratio of means, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04, I2 = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this meta-analysis, the usage of hearing restorative devices by participants with hearing loss was associated with a 19% decrease in hazards of long-term cognitive decline. Furthermore, usage of these devices was significantly associated with a 3% improvement in cognitive test scores that assessed general cognition in the short term. A cognitive benefit of hearing restorative devices should be further investigated in randomized trials.
Topics: Humans; Hearing Aids; Cochlear Implants; Cognitive Dysfunction; Hearing Loss; Dementia
PubMed: 36469314
DOI: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.4427 -
International Journal of Geriatric... Oct 2022Lewy body dementia (LBD) refers to both dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and Parkinson's disease with dementia (PDD). Sleep disturbances are common in LBD, and can... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Lewy body dementia (LBD) refers to both dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and Parkinson's disease with dementia (PDD). Sleep disturbances are common in LBD, and can include poor sleep quality, excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS), and rapid eye movement behaviour disorder (RBD). Despite the high clinical prevalence of sleep disturbances in LBD, they are under-studied relative to other dementias. The aim of the present systematic review was to examine the nature of sleep disturbances in LBD, summarise the effect of treatment studies upon sleep, and highlight specific and necessary directions for future research.
METHODS
Published studies in English were located by searching PubMED and PSYCArticles databases (until 10 June 2022). The search protocol was pre-registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021293490) and performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines.
RESULTS
Following full-text review, a final total of 70 articles were included. These included 20 studies focussing on subjective sleep, 14 on RBD, 8 on EDS, 7 on objective sleep, and 1 on circadian rhythms. The majority of the 18 treatment studies used pharmacological interventions (n = 12), had an open-label design (n = 8), and were of low-to-moderate quality. Most studies (n = 55) included only patients with DLB. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, we reported a narrative synthesis without meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
At least one form of sleep disturbance may be present in as many as 90% of people with LBD. Subjectively poor sleep quality, excessive daytime sleepiness, and RBD are more common and severe in LBD relative to other dementias.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Disorders of Excessive Somnolence; Humans; Lewy Body Disease; Sleep; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders; Sleep Wake Disorders
PubMed: 36168299
DOI: 10.1002/gps.5814