-
The Gerontologist Nov 2019Anxiety is a major mental disorder in later life that impacts on activities of daily living and quality of life for adults living with dementia in nursing homes. The aim...
UNLABELLED
Anxiety is a major mental disorder in later life that impacts on activities of daily living and quality of life for adults living with dementia in nursing homes. The aim of this article was to systematically review nonpharmacological interventions for older adults living in nursing homes who experience comorbid anxiety and dementia.
METHOD
A systematic literature search was conducted across key databases (Cinahl, ASSIA, Cochrane reviews and trials, psycARTICLES, psycINFO, and PubMed) to identify studies measuring anxiety as an outcome for an intervention for older adults living with dementia in nursing homes, up to December 31, 2017.
RESULTS
The search yielded a total of 1,925 articles with 45 articles accessed for full article review. A total of 13 articles were included in this review following quality appraisal based on Cochrane methodology with six different anxiety measures used. The studies included were moderate to high-quality randomized control trials although heterogeneity precluded a combined meta-analysis.
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
The most common interventions used to address anxiety in this population were music therapy and activity-based interventions although there was limited evidence for the efficacy of either intervention. Little is known about effective nonpharmacological treatment for anxiety for people living with dementia in nursing homes. Further research using consistent measurement tools and time points is required to identify effective interventions to improve the quality of life for people living with both dementia and anxiety in nursing homes.
Topics: Aged; Anxiety; Dementia; Humans; Nursing Homes
PubMed: 31054222
DOI: 10.1093/geront/gnz020 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2021Dementia is a progressive global cognitive impairment syndrome. In 2010, more than 35 million people worldwide were estimated to be living with dementia. Some people... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Dementia is a progressive global cognitive impairment syndrome. In 2010, more than 35 million people worldwide were estimated to be living with dementia. Some people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) will progress to dementia but others remain stable or recover full function. There is great interest in finding good predictors of dementia in people with MCI. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the best-known and the most often used short screening tool for providing an overall measure of cognitive impairment in clinical, research and community settings.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the accuracy of the Mini Mental State Examination for the early detection of dementia in people with mild cognitive impairment SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS (Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Specialized Register of diagnostic and intervention studies (inception to May 2014); MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1946 to May 2014); EMBASE (OvidSP) (1980 to May 2014); BIOSIS (Web of Science) (inception to May 2014); Web of Science Core Collection, including the Conference Proceedings Citation Index (ISI Web of Science) (inception to May 2014); PsycINFO (OvidSP) (inception to May 2014), and LILACS (BIREME) (1982 to May 2014). We also searched specialized sources of diagnostic test accuracy studies and reviews, most recently in May 2014: MEDION (Universities of Maastricht and Leuven, www.mediondatabase.nl), DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, via the Cochrane Library), HTA Database (Health Technology Assessment Database, via the Cochrane Library), and ARIF (University of Birmingham, UK, www.arif.bham.ac.uk). No language or date restrictions were applied to the electronic searches and methodological filters were not used as a method to restrict the search overall so as to maximize sensitivity. We also checked reference lists of relevant studies and reviews, tracked citations in Scopus and Science Citation Index, used searches of known relevant studies in PubMed to track related articles, and contacted research groups conducting work on MMSE for dementia diagnosis to try to locate possibly relevant but unpublished data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered longitudinal studies in which results of the MMSE administered to MCI participants at baseline were obtained and the reference standard was obtained by follow-up over time. We included participants recruited and clinically classified as individuals with MCI under Petersen and revised Petersen criteria, Matthews criteria, or a Clinical Dementia Rating = 0.5. We used acceptable and commonly used reference standards for dementia in general, Alzheimer's dementia, Lewy body dementia, vascular dementia and frontotemporal dementia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We screened all titles generated by the electronic database searches. Two review authors independently assessed the abstracts of all potentially relevant studies. We assessed the identified full papers for eligibility and extracted data to create two by two tables for dementia in general and other dementias. Two authors independently performed quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool. Due to high heterogeneity and scarcity of data, we derived estimates of sensitivity at fixed values of specificity from the model we fitted to produce the summary receiver operating characteristic curve.
MAIN RESULTS
In this review, we included 11 heterogeneous studies with a total number of 1569 MCI patients followed for conversion to dementia. Four studies assessed the role of baseline scores of the MMSE in conversion from MCI to all-cause dementia and eight studies assessed this test in conversion from MCI to Alzheimer´s disease dementia. Only one study provided information about the MMSE and conversion from MCI to vascular dementia. For conversion from MCI to dementia in general, the accuracy of baseline MMSE scores ranged from sensitivities of 23% to 76% and specificities from 40% to 94%. In relationship to conversion from MCI to Alzheimer's disease dementia, the accuracy of baseline MMSE scores ranged from sensitivities of 27% to 89% and specificities from 32% to 90%. Only one study provided information about conversion from MCI to vascular dementia, presenting a sensitivity of 36% and a specificity of 80% with an incidence of vascular dementia of 6.2%. Although we had planned to explore possible sources of heterogeneity, this was not undertaken due to the scarcity of studies included in our analysis.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Our review did not find evidence supporting a substantial role of MMSE as a stand-alone single-administration test in the identification of MCI patients who could develop dementia. Clinicians could prefer to request additional and extensive tests to be sure about the management of these patients. An important aspect to assess in future updates is if conversion to dementia from MCI stages could be predicted better by MMSE changes over time instead of single measurements. It is also important to assess if a set of tests, rather than an isolated one, may be more successful in predicting conversion from MCI to dementia.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Cognitive Dysfunction; Dementia; Dementia, Vascular; Disease Progression; Early Diagnosis; Frontotemporal Dementia; Humans; Lewy Body Disease; Mental Status and Dementia Tests; Neuropsychological Tests; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 34313331
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010783.pub3 -
The Gerontologist Apr 2022The concept of person-centered care has been utilized/adapted to various interventions to enhance health-related outcomes and ensure the quality of care delivered to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
The concept of person-centered care has been utilized/adapted to various interventions to enhance health-related outcomes and ensure the quality of care delivered to persons living with dementia. A few systematic reviews have been conducted on the use of person-centered interventions in the context of dementia care, but to date, none have analyzed intervention effect by intervention type and target outcome. This study aimed to review person-centered interventions used in the context of dementia care and examine their effectiveness.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. We searched through 5 databases for randomized controlled trials that utilized person-centered interventions in persons living with dementia from 1998 to 2019. Study quality was assessed using the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence checklist. The outcomes of interest for the meta-analysis were behavioral and psychological symptoms in dementia (BPSD) and cognitive function assessed immediately after the baseline measurement.
RESULTS
In total, 36 studies were systematically reviewed. Intervention types were reminiscence, music, and cognitive therapies, and multisensory stimulation. Thirty studies were included in the meta-analysis. Results showed a moderate effect size for overall intervention, a small one for music therapy, and a moderate one for reminiscence therapy on BPSD and cognitive function.
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
Generally speaking, person-centered interventions showed immediate intervention effects on reducing BPSD and improving cognitive function, although the effect size and significance of each outcome differed by intervention type. Thus, health care providers should consider person-centered interventions as a vital element in dementia care.
Topics: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Dementia; Humans; Patient-Centered Care; Psychotherapy; Self Care
PubMed: 33326573
DOI: 10.1093/geront/gnaa207 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2021Dementia is a chronic, progressive and ultimately fatal neurodegenerative disease. Advanced dementia is characterised by profound cognitive impairment, inability to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dementia is a chronic, progressive and ultimately fatal neurodegenerative disease. Advanced dementia is characterised by profound cognitive impairment, inability to communicate verbally and complete functional dependence. Usual care of people with advanced dementia is not underpinned universally by a palliative approach. Palliative care has focused traditionally on care of people with cancer, but for more than a decade, there have been calls worldwide to extend palliative care services to include all people with life-limiting illnesses in need of specialist care, including people with dementia. This review is an updated version of a review first published in 2016.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of palliative care interventions in advanced dementia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register on 7 October 2020. ALOIS contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of several major healthcare databases, trial registries and grey literature sources. We ran additional searches across MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), four other databases and two trial registries on 7 October 2020 to ensure that the searches were as comprehensive and as up-to-date as possible.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised (RCTs) and non-randomised controlled trials (nRCTs), controlled before-and-after studies and interrupted time series studies evaluating the impact of palliative care interventions for adults with advanced dementia of any type. Participants could be people with advanced dementia, their family members, clinicians or paid care staff. We included clinical interventions and non-clinical interventions. Comparators were usual care or another palliative care intervention. We did not exclude studies based on outcomes measured.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors (SW, EM, PC) independently assessed all potential studies identified in the search against the review inclusion criteria. Two authors independently extracted data from eligible studies. Where appropriate, we estimated pooled treatment effects in a fixed-effect meta-analysis. We assessed the risk of bias of included studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine studies (2122 participants) met the review inclusion criteria. Two studies were individually-randomised RCTs, six were cluster-randomised RCTs and one was a controlled before-and-after study. We conducted two separate comparisons: organisation and delivery of care interventions versus usual care (six studies, 1162 participants) and advance care planning interventions versus usual care (three studies, 960 participants). Two studies were carried out in acute hospitals and seven in nursing homes or long-term care facilities. For both comparisons, we found the included studies to be sufficiently similar to conduct meta-analyses. Changes to the organisation and delivery of care for people with advanced dementia may increase comfort in dying (MD 1.49, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.64; 5 studies, 335 participants; very low certainty evidence). However, the evidence is very uncertain and unlikely to be clinically significant. These changes may also increase the likelihood of having a palliative care plan in place (RR 5.84, 95% CI 1.37 to 25.02; 1 study, 99 participants; I = 0%; very low certainty evidence), but again the evidence is very uncertain. Such interventions probably have little effect on the use of non-palliative interventions (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.72; 2 studies, 292 participants; I = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). They may also have little or no effect on documentation of advance directives (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.25; 2 studies, 112 participants; I = 52%; very low certainty evidence), or whether discussions take place about advance care planning (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.18; 1 study, 193 participants; I = 0%; very low certainty evidence) and goals of care (RR 2.36, 95% CI 1.00 to 5.54; 1 study, 13 participants; I = 0%; low certainty evidence). No included studies assessed adverse effects. Advance care planning interventions for people with advanced dementia probably increase the documentation of advance directives (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.41; 2 studies, 384; moderate certainty evidence) and the number of discussions about goals of care (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.59; 2 studies, 384 participants; moderate certainty evidence). They may also slightly increase concordance with goals of care (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.79; 1 study, 63 participants; low certainty evidence). On the other hand, they may have little or no effect on perceived symptom management (MD -1.80, 95% CI -6.49 to 2.89; 1 study, 67 participants; very low certainty evidence) or whether advance care planning discussions occur (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.24; 1 study, 67 participants; low certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence on palliative care interventions in advanced dementia is limited in quantity and certainty. When compared to usual care, changes to the organisation and delivery of care for people with advanced dementia may lead to improvements in comfort in dying, but the evidence for this was of very low certainty. Advance care planning interventions, compared to usual care, probably increase the documentation of advance directives and the occurrence of discussions about goals of care, and may also increase concordance with goals of care. We did not detect other effects. The uncertainty in the evidence across all outcomes in both comparisons is mainly driven by imprecision of effect estimates and risk of bias in the included studies.
Topics: Adult; Bias; Dementia; Family; Humans; Neurodegenerative Diseases; Palliative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34582034
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011513.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2019Dementia is a chronic condition which progressively affects memory and other cognitive functions, social behaviour, and ability to carry out daily activities. To date,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Dementia is a chronic condition which progressively affects memory and other cognitive functions, social behaviour, and ability to carry out daily activities. To date, no treatment is clearly effective in preventing progression of the disease, and most treatments are symptomatic, often aiming to improve people's psychological symptoms or behaviours which are challenging for carers. A range of new therapeutic strategies has been evaluated in research, and the use of trained animals in therapy sessions, termed animal-assisted therapy (AAT), is receiving increasing attention.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of animal-assisted therapy for people with dementia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS: the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register on 5 September 2019. ALOIS contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of major healthcare databases, trial registries, and grey literature sources. We also searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), PsycINFO (OvidSP), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), ISI Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO's trial registry portal.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-randomised trials, and randomised cross-over trials that compared AAT versus no AAT, AAT using live animals versus alternatives such as robots or toys, or AAT versus any other active intervention.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We extracted data using the standard methods of Cochrane Dementia. Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of the retrieved records. We expressed our results using mean difference (MD), standardised mean difference (SMD), and risk ratio (RR) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) where appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine RCTs from 10 reports. All nine studies were conducted in Europe and the US. Six studies were parallel-group, individually randomised RCTs; one was a randomised cross-over trial; and two were cluster-RCTs that were possibly related where randomisation took place at the level of the day care and nursing home. We identified two ongoing trials from trial registries. There were three comparisons: AAT versus no AAT (standard care or various non-animal-related activities), AAT using live animals versus robotic animals, and AAT using live animals versus the use of a soft animal toy. The studies evaluated 305 participants with dementia. One study used horses and the remainder used dogs as the therapy animal. The duration of the intervention ranged from six weeks to six months, and the therapy sessions lasted between 10 and 90 minutes each, with a frequency ranging from one session every two weeks to two sessions per week. There was a wide variety of instruments used to measure the outcomes. All studies were at high risk of performance bias and unclear risk of selection bias. Our certainty about the results for all major outcomes was very low to moderate. Comparing AAT versus no AAT, participants who received AAT may be slightly less depressed after the intervention (MD -2.87, 95% CI -5.24 to -0.50; 2 studies, 83 participants; low-certainty evidence), but they did not appear to have improved quality of life (MD 0.45, 95% CI -1.28 to 2.18; 3 studies, 164 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There were no clear differences in all other major outcomes, including social functioning (MD -0.40, 95% CI -3.41 to 2.61; 1 study, 58 participants; low-certainty evidence), problematic behaviour (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.98 to 0.30; 3 studies, 142 participants; very-low-certainty evidence), agitation (SMD -0.39, 95% CI -0.89 to 0.10; 3 studies, 143 participants; very-low-certainty evidence), activities of daily living (MD 4.65, 95% CI -16.05 to 25.35; 1 study, 37 participants; low-certainty evidence), and self-care ability (MD 2.20, 95% CI -1.23 to 5.63; 1 study, 58 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no data on adverse events. Comparing AAT using live animals versus robotic animals, one study (68 participants) found mixed effects on social function, with longer duration of physical contact but shorter duration of talking in participants who received AAT using live animals versus robotic animals (median: 93 seconds with live versus 28 seconds with robotic for physical contact; 164 seconds with live versus 206 seconds with robotic for talk directed at a person; 263 seconds with live versus 307 seconds with robotic for talk in total). Another study showed no clear differences between groups in behaviour measured using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (MD -6.96, 95% CI -14.58 to 0.66; 78 participants; low-certainty evidence) or quality of life (MD -2.42, 95% CI -5.71 to 0.87; 78 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no data on the other outcomes. Comparing AAT using live animals versus a soft toy cat, one study (64 participants) evaluated only social functioning, in the form of duration of contact and talking. The data were expressed as median and interquartile ranges. Duration of contact was slightly longer in participants in the AAT group and duration of talking slightly longer in those exposed to the toy cat. This was low-certainty evidence.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found low-certainty evidence that AAT may slightly reduce depressive symptoms in people with dementia. We found no clear evidence that AAT affects other outcomes in this population, with our certainty in the evidence ranging from very-low to moderate depending on the outcome. We found no evidence on safety or effects on the animals. Therefore, clear conclusions cannot yet be drawn about the overall benefits and risks of AAT in people with dementia. Further well-conducted RCTs are needed to improve the certainty of the evidence. In view of the difficulty in achieving blinding of participants and personnel in such trials, future RCTs should work on blinding outcome assessors, document allocation methods clearly, and include major patient-important outcomes such as affect, emotional and social functioning, quality of life, adverse events, and outcomes for animals.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Animal Assisted Therapy; Animals; Cognition; Dementia; Depression; Dogs; Horses; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31763689
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013243.pub2 -
GeroScience Jun 2022Vascular contribution to cognitive impairment and dementia (VCID) is a clinical label encompassing a wide range of cognitive disorders progressing from mild to major... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Vascular contribution to cognitive impairment and dementia (VCID) is a clinical label encompassing a wide range of cognitive disorders progressing from mild to major vascular cognitive impairment (VCI), which is also defined as vascular dementia (VaD). VaD diagnosis is mainly based on clinical and imaging findings. Earlier biomarkers are needed to identify subjects at risk to develop mild VCI and VaD. In the present meta-analysis, we comprehensively evaluated the role of inflammatory biomarkers in differential diagnosis between VaD and Alzheimer's disease (AD), and assessed their prognostic value on predicting VaD incidence. We collected literature until January 31, 2021, assessing three inflammatory markers [interleukin(IL)-6, C-reactive protein (CRP), tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α] from blood or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples. Thirteen cross-sectional and seven prospective studies were included. Blood IL-6 levels were cross-sectionally significantly higher in people with VaD compared to AD patients (SMD: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.62) with low heterogeneity (I: 41%, p = 0.13). Higher IL-6 levels were also associated to higher risk of incident VaD (relative risk: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.59, I: 0%). IL-6 in CSF was significantly higher in people with VaD compared to healthy subjects (SMD: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.17 to 1.37, I: 70%), and not compared to AD patients, but due to limited evidence and high inconsistency across studies, we could not draw definite conclusion. Higher blood IL-6 levels might represent a useful biomarker able to differentiate people with VaD from those with AD and might be correlated with higher risk of future VaD.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Biomarkers; Cognitive Dysfunction; Cross-Sectional Studies; Dementia, Vascular; Humans; Interleukin-6; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 35486344
DOI: 10.1007/s11357-022-00556-w -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Sep 2023Oldest-old is the fastest growing segment of society. A substantial number of these individuals are cognitively impaired or demented. Given the lack of a cure, attention... (Review)
Review
Oldest-old is the fastest growing segment of society. A substantial number of these individuals are cognitively impaired or demented. Given the lack of a cure, attention is directed to lifestyle interventions that could help alleviate the stress in patients, their families, and society. The aim of this review was to identify lifestyle factors with important roles in dementia prevention in oldest-old. Searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science. We identified 27 observational cohort studies that met the inclusion criteria. Results showed that eating a healthy diet with plenty of fruits and vegetables, and participation in leisure and physical activities may protect against cognitive decline and cognitive impairment among oldest-old regardless of the APOE genotype. Combined lifestyles may generate multiplicative effects than individual factors. This is the first review known to systematically examine the association between lifestyle and cognitive health in oldest-old. Lifestyle interventions for diet, leisure, or a combination of lifestyles could be beneficial for cognitive function in oldest-old. Interventional studies are warranted to strengthen the evidence.
Topics: Humans; Aged, 80 and over; Dementia; Cognitive Dysfunction; Cognition; Life Style; Diet
PubMed: 37321363
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105286 -
Journal of Medical Internet Research Sep 2020Caring for people with dementia is perceived as one of the most stressful and difficult forms of caring. Family caregivers always experience high levels of psychological... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Caring for people with dementia is perceived as one of the most stressful and difficult forms of caring. Family caregivers always experience high levels of psychological burden and physical strain, so effective and practical support is essential. Internet-based supportive interventions can provide convenient and efficient support and education to potentially reduce the physical and psychological burden associated with providing care.
OBJECTIVE
This review aimed to (1) assess the efficacy of internet-based supportive interventions in ameliorating health outcomes for family caregivers of people with dementia, and (2) evaluate the potential effects of internet-based supportive intervention access by caregivers on their care recipients.
METHODS
An electronic literature search of the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO databases was conducted up to January 2020. Two reviewers (ML and YZ) worked independently to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met the inclusion criteria and independently extracted data. The quality of the included RCTs was evaluated using the approach recommended by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs were applied to calculate the pooled effect sizes.
RESULTS
In total, 17 RCTs met the eligibility criteria and were included in this systematic review. The meta-analysis showed that internet-based supportive interventions significantly ameliorated depressive symptoms (SMD=-0.21; 95% CI -0.31 to -0.10; P<.001), perceived stress (SMD=-0.40; 95% CI -0.55 to -0.24; P<.001), anxiety (SMD=-0.33; 95% CI -0.51 to -0.16; P<.001), and self-efficacy (SMD=0.19; 95% CI 0.05-0.33; P=.007) in dementia caregivers. No significant improvements were found in caregiver burden, coping competence, caregiver reactions to behavioral symptoms, or quality of life. Six studies assessed the unintended effects of internet-based supportive intervention access by caregivers on their care recipients. The results showed that internet-based supportive interventions had potential benefits on the quality of life and neuropsychiatric symptoms in care recipients.
CONCLUSIONS
Internet-based supportive interventions are generally effective at ameliorating depressive symptoms, perceived stress, anxiety, and self-efficacy in dementia caregivers and have potential benefits on care recipients. Future studies are encouraged to adopt personalized internet-based supportive interventions to improve the health of family caregivers and their care recipients.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42020162434; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=162434.
Topics: Caregivers; Dementia; Humans; Internet-Based Intervention; Quality of Life
PubMed: 32902388
DOI: 10.2196/19468 -
The Lancet. Healthy Longevity Jan 2024Cognitive impairment and dementia are highly prevalent among stroke survivors and represent a major burden for patients, carers, and health-care systems. We studied the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Cognitive impairment and dementia are highly prevalent among stroke survivors and represent a major burden for patients, carers, and health-care systems. We studied the risk factors for post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) and dementia (PSD) beyond the well established risk factors of age and stroke severity.
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis we conducted a systematic literature search from database inception until Sept 15, 2023. We selected prospective and retrospective cohort studies, post-hoc analyses from randomised controlled trials, and nested case-control studies of patients with acute stroke (ischaemic, haemorrhagic, and transient ischaemic attack), exploring associations between risk factors at baseline and PSCI or PSD over a follow-up period of at least 3 months. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. We calculated pooled relative risks (RRs) with random-effects meta-analyses and performed subgroup, meta-regression, and sensitivity analyses. This study was preregistered with PROSPERO, CRD42020164959.
FINDINGS
We identified 162 eligible articles for our systematic review, of which 113 articles (89 studies, 160 783 patients) were eligible for meta-analysis. Baseline cognitive impairment was the strongest risk factor for PSCI (RR 2·00, 95% CI 1·66-2·40) and PSD (3·10, 2·77-3·47). We identified diabetes (1·29, 1·14-1·45), presence or history of atrial fibrillation (1·29, 1·04-1·60), presence of moderate or severe white matter hyperintensities (WMH; 1·51, 1·20-1·91), and WMH severity (1·30, 1·10-1·55, per SD increase) as treatable risk factors for PSCI, independent of age and stroke severity. For PSD, we identified diabetes (1·38, 1·10-1·72), presence of moderate or severe WMH (1·55, 1·01-2·38), and WMH severity (1·61, 1·20-2·14, per SD increase) as treatable risk factors. Additional risk factors included lower educational attainment, previous stroke, left hemisphere stroke, presence of three or more lacunes, brain atrophy, and low baseline functional status. Associations of risk factors with PSD were weaker in studies conducted and published more recently. We found substantial interstudy heterogeneity and evidence of reporting bias.
INTERPRETATION
Our results highlight the importance of cognitive impairment in the acute phase after stroke for long-term prediction of PSCI and PSD. Treatable risk factors include diabetes, atrial fibrillation, and markers of cerebral small vessel disease (ie, white matter hyperintensities and lacunes). Future trials should explore these risk factors as potential targets for prevention of PSCI and PSD.
FUNDING
German Research Foundation.
Topics: Humans; Brain Ischemia; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Atrial Fibrillation; Stroke; Cognitive Dysfunction; Risk Factors; Dementia; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 38101426
DOI: 10.1016/S2666-7568(23)00217-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2020Approximately 60% to 80% of people with Parkinson's disease (PD) experience cognitive impairment that impacts on their quality of life. Cognitive decline is a core... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Approximately 60% to 80% of people with Parkinson's disease (PD) experience cognitive impairment that impacts on their quality of life. Cognitive decline is a core feature of the disease and can often present before the onset of motor symptoms. Cognitive training may be a useful non-pharmacological intervention that could help to maintain or improve cognition and quality of life for people with PD dementia (PDD) or PD-related mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI).
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether cognitive training (targeting single or multiple domains) improves cognition in people with PDD and PD-MCI or other clearly defined forms of cognitive impairment in people with PD.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group Trials Register (8 August 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. We searched reference lists and trial registers, searched relevant reviews in the area and conference proceedings. We also contacted experts for clarifications on data and ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials where the participants had PDD or PD-MCI, and where the intervention was intended to train general or specific areas of cognitive function, targeting either a single domain or multiple domains of cognition, and was compared to a control condition. Multicomponent interventions that also included motor or other elements were considered eligible.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles for inclusion in the review. Two review authors also independently undertook extraction of data and assessment of methodological quality. We used GRADE methods to assess the overall quality of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
Seven studies with a total of 225 participants met the inclusion criteria for this review. All seven studies compared the effects of a cognitive training intervention to a control intervention at the end of treatment periods lasting four to eight weeks. Six studies included people with PD living in the community. These six studies recruited people with single-domain (executive) or multiple-domain mild cognitive impairment in PD. Four of these studies identified participants with MCI using established diagnostic criteria, and two included both people with PD-MCI and people with PD who were not cognitively impaired. One study recruited people with a diagnosis of PD dementia who were living in long-term care settings. The cognitive training intervention in three studies targeted a single cognitive domain, whilst in four studies multiple domains of cognitive function were targeted. The comparison groups either received no intervention or took part in recreational activities (sports, music, arts), speech or language exercises, computerised motor therapy, or motor rehabilitation combined with recreational activity. We found no clear evidence that cognitive training improved global cognition. Although cognitive training was associated with higher scores on global cognition at the end of treatment, the result was imprecise and not statistically significant (6 trials, 178 participants, standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.03 to 0.59; low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference at the end of treatment between cognitive training and control interventions on executive function (5 trials, 112 participants; SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.48; low-certainty evidence) or visual processing (3 trials, 64 participants; SMD 0.30, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.81; low-certainty evidence). The evidence favoured the cognitive training group on attention (5 trials, 160 participants; SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.68; low-certainty evidence) and verbal memory (5 trials, 160 participants; SMD 0.37, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.69; low-certainty evidence), but these effects were less certain in sensitivity analyses that excluded a study in which only a minority of the sample were cognitively impaired. There was no evidence of differences between treatment and control groups in activities of daily living (3 trials, 67 participants; SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.53; low-certainty evidence) or quality of life (5 trials, 147 participants; SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.33; low-certainty evidence). There was very little information on adverse events. We considered the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes to be low due to risk of bias in the included studies and imprecision of the results. We identified six ongoing trials recruiting participants with PD-MCI, but no ongoing trials of cognitive training for people with PDD.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review found no evidence that people with PD-MCI or PDD who receive cognitive training for four to eight weeks experience any important cognitive improvements at the end of training. However, this conclusion was based on a small number of studies with few participants, limitations of study design and execution, and imprecise results. There is a need for more robust, adequately powered studies of cognitive training before conclusions can be drawn about the effectiveness of cognitive training for people with PDD and PD-MCI. Studies should use formal criteria to diagnose cognitive impairments, and there is a particular need for more studies testing the efficacy of cognitive training in people with PDD.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cognitive Dysfunction; Dementia; Humans; Parkinson Disease; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Task Performance and Analysis
PubMed: 32101639
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011961.pub2