Search

Purpose of Review: Discuss the state of the literature for the treatment of comorbid epilepsy and cognitive dysfunction, specifically focusing on the older adult. Recent Findings: Epilepsy and cognitive dysfunction are neuronal network disorders with converging molecular underpinnings. Anti-seizure medication is not obligatory after the first instance of a seizure in the setting of cognitive dysfunction. In the absence of randomized controlled trials, current practice is largely based on individual clinical presentation and estimated risk of recurrence. Screening for epilepsy in the context of cognitive dysfunction and cognitive dysfunction in the context of epilepsy should occur early and often throughout treatment. Summary: Decreasing central nervous system polypharmacy is highly recommended in elderly patients, and early cognitive/epilepsy screening may improve both treatment and clinical outcomes. Neuromodulatory techniques and diet modifications are promising treatments that would benefit from additional research. Overall, elucidating the pathological mechanisms that connect epilepsy and cognitive impairment in this population could help direct future treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With 20 million living veterans and millions more immediate family members, and approximately 9 million veterans enrolled in the nationally networked VA healthcare system, representing the interests and needs of veterans in this complex community is a substantial endeavor. Based on the importance of engaging Veterans in research, the VA Health Services Research and Development (HSR&D) Service convened a Working Group of VA researchers and Veterans to conduct a review of patient engagement models and develop recommendations for an approach to engage Veterans in health research that would incorporate their unique lived experiences and interests, and their perspectives on research priorities. The Working Group considered the specific context for Veteran engagement in research that includes other VA stakeholders from the operational and clinical leadership of the VA Health Administration (VHA). The resulting model identifies the range of potential stakeholders and three domains of relevant constructs—processes expected to facilitate Veteran engagement in research with other stakeholders, individual stakeholder and external factors, and outcomes. The expectation is that Veteran engagement will benefit research to policy and practice translation, including increasing the transparency of research and producing knowledge that is readily accepted and implemented in healthcare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fourth, health systems must develop robust partnerships with community programs and organizations that support caregivers.[2] A public health approach to meeting caregiver needs could reduce unmet needs and improve caregiver and care recipient outcomes (https://www.rosalynncarter.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/RCI%5fRecalibrating-for-Caregivers%5f2020.pdf). Care team huddles that loop in caregivers by phone could be a powerful approach for coordinating care.[25] Harnessing the advantage of virtual visits and asynchronous communication may support caregivers' involvement in care discussions. The need to integrate health care with "social care", or an understanding of an individual's social context, is well-recognized by clinicians (https://www.nap.edu/resource/25467/09252019Social%5fCare%5frecommendations.pdf). [Extracted from the article]

Implementation of the Veterans Choice Program (VCP) allows Veterans to receive care paid for by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in community settings. However, the quality of that care is unknown, particularly for complex conditions such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). A cross-sectional survey was conducted of 668 community primary care and mental health providers in Texas and Vermont to describe use of guideline-recommended treatments (GRTs) for PTSD. Relatively, few providers reported using guideline-recommended psychotherapy or prescribing practices. More than half of psychotherapists reported the use of at least one guideline-recommended psychotherapy for PTSD, but fewer reported the use of core treatment components, prior training in the GRT(s) they use, or adherence to a treatment manual. Suboptimal prescribing for PTSD patients was reported more commonly than optimal prescribing. Findings raise critical questions regarding how to ensure veterans seeking PTSD care in community settings receive psychotherapy and/or prescribing consistent with clinical practice guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

U. S. veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan are known to have a high prevalence of traumatic brain injury (TBI), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and depression, which are often comorbid and share many symptoms. Attempts to describe this cohort by single diagnoses have limited our understanding of the complex nature of this population. The objective of this study was to identify subgroups of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans (IAVs) with distinct compositions of symptoms associated with TBI, PTSD, and depression. Our cross-sectional, observational study included 303,716 IAVs who received care in the Veterans Health Administration in 2010-2011. Symptoms and conditions were defined using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes and symptom-clusters were identified using latent class analysis. We identified seven classes with distinct symptom compositions. One class had low probability of any condition and low health care utilization (HCU) (48 %). Other classes were characterized by high probabilities of mental health comorbidities (14 %); chronic pain and sleep disturbance (20 %); headaches and memory problems (6 %); and auditory problems (2.5 %). Another class had mental health comorbidities and chronic pain (7 %), and the last had high probabilities of most symptoms examined (3 %). These last two classes had the highest likelihood of TBI, PTSD, and depression and were identified as high healthcare utilizers. There are subgroups of IAVs with distinct clusters of symptom that are meaningfully associated with TBI, PTSD, depression, and HCU. Additional studies examining these veteran subgroups could improve our understanding of this complex comorbid patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In response to dramatic increases in obesity prevalence, clinical guidelines urge health care providers to prevent and treat obesity more aggressively.Objective: To describe the proportion of obese primary care patients receiving obesity care over a 5-year period and identify factors predicting receipt of care.Design: Retrospective cohort study utilizing VHA administrative data from 6 of 21 VA administrative regions.Patients: Veterans seen in primary care in FY2002 with a body mass index (BMI) > or =30 kg/m(2) based on heights and weights recorded in the electronic medical record (EMR), survival through FY2006, and active care (1 or more visits in at least 3 follow-up years FY2003-2006).Main Measures: Receipt of outpatient visits for individual or group education or instruction in nutrition, exercise, or weight management; receipt of prescriptions for any FDA-approved medications for weight reduction; and receipt of bariatric surgery.Key Results: Of 933,084 (88.6%) of 1,053,228 primary care patients who had recorded heights and weights allowing calculation of BMI, 330,802 (35.5%) met criteria for obesity. Among obese patients who survived and received active care (N = 264,667), 53.5% had a recorded obesity diagnosis, 34.1% received at least one outpatient visit for obesity-related education or counseling, 0.4% received weight-loss medications, and 0.2% had bariatric surgery between FY2002-FY2006. In multivariable analysis, patients older than 65 years (OR = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.60-0.64) were less likely to receive obesity-related education, whereas those prescribed 5-7 or 8 or more medication classes (OR = 1.41; 1.38-1.45; OR = 1.94; 1.88-2.00, respectively) or diagnosed with obesity (OR = 4.0; 3.92-4.08) or diabetes (OR = 2.23; 2.18-2.27) were more likely to receive obesity-related education.Conclusions: Substantial numbers of VHA primary care patients did not have sufficient height or weight data recorded to calculate BMI or have recorded obesity diagnoses when warranted. Receipt of obesity education varied by sociodemographic and clinical factors; providers may need to be cognizant of these when engaging patients in treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The incidence of epilepsy in patients aged >60 years is higher than in any other period of life. Yet, until recently, what was known about the treatment of older patients with epilepsy has been inferred from studies in younger patients. A growing body of clinical evidence focused exclusively on the elderly suggests that, while some issues are similar for older and younger adults, older patients with epilepsy may require even more attention regarding antiepileptic drug (AED) selection than younger patients. This article reviews published guidelines and recommendations to identify explicit recommendations for use of specific AEDs in the elderly, and assesses the extent to which those recommendations have been adopted in clinical practice.We found that while one systematically derived guideline stated that lamotrigine may be a good choice for older patients because of its favourable adverse effect profile, only clinical recommendations based on expert opinion explicitly identified AEDs that are more and less appropriate for use in the elderly. Examination of published studies describing recent AED-prescribing patterns suggests that clinical recommendations have been, at best, slowly adopted. This observation is exemplified by the fact that older patients newly diagnosed with epilepsy are still prescribed phenobarbital – a drug identified as suboptimal in 1985.In order to better understand the delay in adopting clinical recommendations, we examine these findings in light of diffusion of innovations theory, a theory that has been used to understand dissemination of other new medical technologies. According to this theory, while it is too early to suggest that use of second-generation AEDs in the elderly has been delayed, the continued use of phenobarbital in older patients newly diagnosed with epilepsy represents a serious delay in adoption of recent guidelines. Delays may be related to lack of knowledge by primary care clinicians and emergency room physicians (who frequently treat older patients with epilepsy), lack of ‘opinion leaders’ in primary care and perhaps general neurology, clinicians’ focus on seizure control as the primary endpoint in treating patients with epilepsy, and difficulties in changing long-standing prescribing patterns.Research targeting barriers to more appropriate prescribing is needed to determine appropriate strategies for changing AED prescribing practices in the elderly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]