Search

Objectives: Diagnosis of patients suspected of mild dementia (MD) is a challenge and patient numbers continue to rise. A short test triaging patients in need of a neuropsychological assessment (NPA) is welcome. The Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) has high sensitivity at the original cutoff <26 for MD, but results in too many false-positive (FP) referrals in clinical practice (low specificity). A cutoff that finds all patients at high risk of MD without referring to many patients not (yet) in need of an NPA is needed. A difficulty is who is to be considered at risk, as definitions for disease (e.g. MD) do not always define health at the same time and thereby create subthreshold disorders., Design: In this study, we compared different selection strategies to efficiently identify patients in need of an NPA. Using the MoCA with a double threshold tackles the dilemma of increasing the specificity without decreasing the sensitivity and creates the opportunity to distinguish the clinical (MD) and subclinical (MCI) state and hence to get their appropriate policy., Setting/participants: Patients referred to old-age psychiatry suspected of cognitive impairment that could benefit from an NPA ( n = 693)., Results: The optimal strategy was a two-stage selection process using the MoCA with a double threshold as an add-on after initial assessment. By selecting who is likely to have dementia and should be assessed further (MoCA<21), who should be discharged (≥26), and who's course should be monitored actively as they are at increased risk (21<26)., Conclusion: By using two cutoffs, the clinical value of the MoCA improved for triaging. A double-threshold MoCA not only gave the best results; accuracy, PPV, NPV, and reducing FP referrals by 65%, still correctly triaging most MD patients. It also identified most MCIs whose intermediate state justifies active monitoring.

Background: Unintended pregnancies (UPs) are a global health problem as they contribute to adverse maternal and offspring outcomes, which underscores the need for prevention. As psychiatric vulnerability has previously been linked to sexual risk behavior, planning capacities and compliance with contraception methods, we aim to explore whether it is a risk factor for UPs., Methods: Electronic databases were searched in November 2020. All articles in English language with data on women with age ≥ 18 with a psychiatric diagnosis at time of conception and reported pregnancy intention were included, irrespective of obstetric outcome (fetal loss, livebirth, or abortion). Studies on women with intellectual disabilities were excluded. We used the National Institutes of Health tool for assessment of bias in individual studies and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method for assessment of quality of the primary outcome., Findings: Eleven studies reporting on psychiatric vulnerability and UPs were included. The participants of these studies were diagnosed with mood, anxiety, psychotic, substance use, conduct and eating disorders. The studies that have been conducted show that women with a psychiatric vulnerability (n = 2650) have an overall higher risk of UPs compared to women without a psychiatric vulnerability (n = 16,031) (OR 1.34, CI 1.08-1.67) and an overall weighed prevalence of UPs of 65% (CI 0.43-0.82) (n = 3881)., Interpretation: Studies conducted on psychiatric vulnerability and UPs are sparse and many (common) psychiatric vulnerabilities have not yet been studied in relation to UPs. The quality of the included studies was rated fair to poor due to difficulties with measuring the outcome pregnancy intention (use of various methods of assessment and use of retrospective study designs with risk of bias) and absence of a control group in most of the studies. The findings suggest an increased risk of UPs in women with psychiatric vulnerability. As UPs have important consequences for mother and child, discussing family planning in women with psychiatric vulnerabilities is of utmost importance., (© 2022. The Author(s).)