Search

Abstract Background Progressive neurodegeneration in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) induces cognitive deterioration, and there is controversy regarding the optimal treatment strategy in early AD. Stimulation therapy, including physical exercise and cholinesterase inhibitors are both reported to postpone cognitive deterioration in separate studies. We aimed to study the effect of stimulation therapy and the additional effect of donepezil on cognitive function in early AD. Method Design: A two-by-two factorial trial comprising stimulation therapy for one year compared to standard care to which a randomized double-blinded placebo controlled trial with donepezil was added. Setting: Nine rural municipalities in Northern Norway. Participants: 187 participants 65 years and older with a recent diagnosis of mild or moderate AD were included in the study of which 146 completed a one-year follow-up. INTERVENTIONS: In five municipalities the participants received stimulation therapy whereas participants in four received standard care. All participants were randomised double-blindly to donepezil or placebo and tested with three different cognitive tests four times during the one-year study period. Main outcome: Changes in MMSE sum score. Secondary outcome: Changes in ADAS-Cog and Clock Drawing Test. Results MMSE scores remained unchanged amongst AD participants receiving stimulation therapy and those receiving standard care. The results were consistent for ADAS-Cog and Clock Drawing Test. No time trend differences were found during one-year follow-up between groups receiving stimulation therapy versus standard care or between donepezil versus placebo. Conclusion In rural AD patients non-pharmacological and pharmacological therapy did not improve outcome compared with standard care but all groups retained cognitive function during one year follow-up. Other studies are needed to confirm these results. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT00443014). EudraCT database (no 2004-002613-37).

Abstract Background Inappropriate medical treatment of co-morbidities in Alzheimer's disease (AD) is an increasing concern in geriatric medicine. The objective of this study was to compare current drug use related to co-morbidity between individuals with a recent diagnosis of AD and a cognitively healthy control group in a population based clinical trial in Northern Norway. Methods Setting: Nine rural municipalities with 70 000 inhabitants in Northern Norway. Participants: Participants with and without AD recruited in general practice and by population based screening. 187 participants with a recent diagnosis of AD were recruited among community dwellers. Of 791 respondents without cognitive symptoms, 500 were randomly selected and invited to further clinical and cognitive testing. The final control group consisted of 200 cognitively healthy individuals from the same municipalities. Demographic characteristics, data on medical history and current medication were included, and a physical and cognitive examination was performed. The statistical analyses were carried out by independent sample t-test, chi-square, ANCOVA and logistic regression. Results A co-morbidity score was significantly higher in AD participants compared to controls. The mean number of drugs was higher for AD participants compared to controls (5.1 ± 3.6 and 2.9 ± 2.4 respectively, p < 0.001 age and gender adjusted), also when adjusted for co-morbidity. AD participants used significantly more anticholinergic, sedative and antidepressant drugs. For nursing home residents with AD the mean number of drugs was significantly higher compared to AD participants living at home (6.9 ± 3.9 and 4.5 ± 3.3, respectively, p < 0.001). Conclusions AD participants were treated with a significantly higher number of drugs as compared to cognitively healthy controls, even after adjustment for co-morbidity. An inappropriate use of anticholinergic and sedative drugs was identified, especially among nursing home residents with AD. The drug burden and the increased risk of adverse reactions among individuals suffering from AD need more attention from prescribing doctors.

Abstract Background In Alzheimer's disease (AD) research patients are usually recruited from clinical practice, memory clinics or nursing homes. Lack of standardised inclusion and diagnostic criteria is a major concern in current AD studies. The aim of the study was to explore whether patient characteristics differ between study samples recruited from general practice and from a population based screening by mail within the same geographic areas in rural Northern Norway. Methods An interventional study in nine municipalities with 70000 inhabitants was designed. Patients were recruited from general practice or by population based screening of cognitive function by mail. We sent a questionnaire to 11807 individuals ≥ 65 years of age of whom 3767 responded. Among these, 438 individuals whose answers raised a suspicion of cognitive impairment were invited to an extended cognitive and clinical examination. Descriptive statistics, chi-square, independent sample t-test and analyses of covariance adjusted for possible confounders were used. Results The final study samples included 100 patients recruited by screening and 87 from general practice. Screening through mail recruited younger and more self-reliant male patients with a higher MMSE sum score, whereas older women with more severe cognitive impairment were recruited from general practice. Adjustment for age did not alter the statistically significant differences of cognitive function, self-reliance and gender distribution between patients recruited by screening and from general practice. Conclusions Different recruitment procedures of individuals with cognitive impairment provided study samples with different demographic characteristics. Initial cognitive screening by mail, preceding extended cognitive testing and clinical examination may be a suitable recruitment strategy in studies of early stage AD. Clinical Registration ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT00443014

Introduction Due to the increasing number of older patients in emergency departments (EDs) with frailty, cognitive impairment and multimorbidity, there is a need for geriatric expertise in EDs. Methods This retrospective study is of older patients visiting Turku University Hospital ED between 2 January and 31 December 2022. Patients aged 75 years of older were screened for frailty using Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST) and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Nonacute, frail patients (CFS ≥4) suitable for Targeted Geriatric Assessment (TGA) (n  = 1096) were scanned for the risk of delirium, cognitive impairment, change in functional status, falls, malnutrition and depression. A comprehensive patient record was made with recommendations for future care. Results TRST was completed in 70% of the ED visits, and two-thirds of those were considered high-risk. Among the patients assessed by the geriatric team (TGA), nonspecific complaint (38%) and falls (35%) were the main reasons for ED admission. Cognitive impairment was present in over 60% and orthostatic hypotension in 40% of the patients. The 72-hour revisit rate for TGA-patients was 2.3%. For the real-life control group, the 72-hour revisit rate was 4.6% (P  = .001). Thirty-day revisit rates were 10% and 16%, respectively (P  < .001). The need for rehabilitation, cognitive evaluation and intensifying home care were the main recommendations for future care. Conclusions TGA approach provides structured and accurate information on older patients' background. This may lead to more precise diagnostics, a thorough consideration of hospital intake and a secure discharge from the ED. Ensuring continuity of care may help to reduce readmissions to EDs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]