Search

Previous surveys revealed that only a minority of clinicians routinely disclosed the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) to their patients. Many health professionals fear that the disclosure could be harmful to the patient. Recent advances in the development of biomarkers and new diagnostic criteria allow for an earlier diagnosis of AD at the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) stage. The Belgian Dementia Council, a group of Belgian experts in the field of dementia, performed a survey among its 44 members about their opinions and practices regarding disclosure of the diagnosis of AD, including MCI due to AD, and its consequences. Twenty-six respondents declared that they often or always disclose the diagnosis of AD to patients with dementia and to patients with MCI when AD CSF biomarkers are abnormal. The majority observed that the disclosure of AD is rarely or never harmful to the patients. Their patients and their caregivers rarely or never demonstrated animosity towards the clinicians following disclosure of the diagnosis of AD. These results should reassure clinicians about the safety of AD diagnosis disclosure in most cases whether the patient is at the MCI or the dementia stage.

Multiple sclerosis is considered to be an immune mediated inflammatory disorder of the central nervous system. It mainly affects young, socioeconomic active patients. Although our armamentarium for this disease has significantly evolved in recent years some patients remain refractory to conventional therapies. In these cases, autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation can be considered as a therapeutic option. Decreasing morbidity, mortality, and increasing patient awareness have led to rising inquiry by our patients about this treatment option. With the aim of a standardized protocol and data registration, a Belgian working party on stem cell therapy in multiple sclerosis was established. In this paper, we report the consensus protocol of this working party on autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in multiple sclerosis.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a highly prevalent condition and its prevalence is expected to further increase due to the aging of the general population. It is obvious that the diagnosis of AD has implications for driving. Finally, driving discussions are also emotionally charged because driving is associated with independence and personal identity. However, it is not clear how to implement this in clinical practice and the Belgian law on driving is rather vague in its referral to neurodegenerative brain diseases in general nor does it provide clear-cut instructions for dementia or AD compared to for example driving for patients with epilepsy and as such does not prove to be very helpful. The present article reviews what is known from both literature and existing guidelines and proposes a consensus recommendation tailored to the Belgian situation agreed by both AD experts and the Belgian Road Safety Institute endorsed by the Belgian Medical Association. It is concluded that the decision about driving fitness should be considered as a dynamic process where the driving fitness is assessed and discussed early after diagnosis and closely monitored by the treating physician. The diagnosis of AD on itself definitely does not imply the immediate and full revocation of a driving license nor does it implicate a necessary referral for a formal on-road driving assessment. There is no evidence to recommend a reduced exposure or a mandatory co-pilot. A MMSE-based framework to trichotomise AD patients as safe, indeterminate or unsafe is presented. The final decision on driving fitness can only be made after careful history taking and clinical examination, neuropsychological, functional and behavioral evaluation and, only for selected cases, a formal assessment of driving performance.

We conducted a survey regarding the medical care of patients with dementia in expert settings in Belgium. Open, unrestricted and motivated answers were centralized, blindly interpreted and structured into categories. The report of the results was then submitted to the participants in subsequent plenary meetings and through email. Fourteen experts responded to the questionnaire, confirming that recent propositions to modify Alzheimer's disease (AD) diagnostic criteria and options have stirred up debate among well-informed and dedicated experts in the field. The opinions were not unanimous and illustrate how difficult it is to find a standardized method of diagnosing this disease. The responses to the survey suggest that application of a step-by-step pragmatic method is used in practice. Only when the combination of clinical findings and classical structural neuro-imaging is insufficient for a diagnosis or suggests an atypical presentation, additional biomarkers are considered. Interestingly, few differences, if any, were observed between the use of biomarkers in MCI and in AD. In conclusion, the Belgian experts consulted in this survey were generally in agreement with the new diagnostic criteria for AD, although some concern was expressed about them being too "amyloidocentric". Although the clinical examination, including a full neuropsychological evaluation, is still considered as the basis for diagnosis, most experts also stated that they use biomarkers to help with diagnosis.