Development of a dementia assessment quality database

Cohort profile: the Norwegian Registry of Persons Assessed for Cognitive Symptoms (NorCog) - a national research and quality registry with a biomaterial collection

PURPOSE

The Norwegian Registry of Persons Assessed for Cognitive Symptoms (NorCog) was established to harmonise and improve the quality of diagnostic practice across clinics assessing persons with cognitive symptoms in Norwegian specialist healthcare units and to establish a large research cohort with extensive clinical data.

PARTICIPANTS

The registry recruits patients who are referred for assessment of cognitive symptoms and suspected dementia at outpatient clinics in Norwegian specialist healthcare units. In total, 18 120 patients have been included in NorCog during the period of 2009-2021. The average age at inclusion was 73.7 years. About half of the patients (46%) were diagnosed with dementia at the baseline assessment, 35% with mild cognitive impairment and 13% with no or subjective cognitive impairment; 7% received other specified diagnoses such as mood disorders.

FINDINGS TO DATE

All patients have a detailed baseline characterisation involving lifestyle and demographic variables; activities of daily living; caregiver situation; medical history; medication; psychiatric, physical and neurological examinations; neurocognitive testing; blood laboratory work-up; and structural or functional brain imaging. Diagnoses are set according to standardised diagnostic criteria. The research biobank stores DNA and blood samples from 4000 patients as well as cerebrospinal fluid from 800 patients. Data from NorCog have been used in a wide range of research projects evaluating and validating dementia-related assessment tools, and identifying patient characteristics, symptoms, functioning and needs, as well as caregiver burden and requirement of available resources.

FUTURE PLANS

The finish date of NorCog was originally in 2029. In 2021, the registry's legal basis was reformalised and NorCog got approval to collect and keep data for as long as is necessary to achieve the purpose of the registry. In 2022, the registry underwent major changes. Paper-based data collection was replaced with digital registration, and the number of variables collected was reduced. Future plans involve expanding the registry to include patients from primary care centres.

How Can Quality of Dementia Care Be Measured? The Development of Clinical Quality Indicators for an Australian Pilot Dementia Registry

BACKGROUND

A clinical quality registry (CQR) for dementia provides benefits to those living with dementia and their carers by improving the quality and experience of care through benchmarking and monitoring patient outcomes. CQRs use data collected to form clinical quality indicators (CQIs) through which variations in clinical processes and outcomes between different services and jurisdictions can be highlighted.

OBJECTIVE

This modified Delphi study aimed to develop CQIs for a pilot Australian CQR for dementia and mild cognitive impairment. These CQIs are based on evidence, patient and caregiver experience, and clinician perspectives across the trajectory of care from diagnosis to end-of-life.

METHODS

An initial list of indicators from existing dementia registries, academic literature, and clinical practice guidelines was synthesized. A working group of clinicians and registry experts further refined these indicators. A panel of experts comprised of a consumer, a carer, clinicians, consumer organization representatives, and academics. The experts participated in three phases of the modified Delphi study: 1) online survey for scoring importance and validity, 2) a one-day face-to-face discussion, and 3) final survey round to assess importance, validity, and feasibility.

RESULTS

The panel assessed 33 CQIs and confirmed a final set of 18 indicators. The CQIs mapped to the domains of quality of diagnosis, quality of management, access to services and supports, and potentially preventable complications. These CQIs will be tested initially in memory clinics and inform the data collection processes for the Australia Dementia Network Registry (ADNet).

CONCLUSION

A dementia CQR is fundamental to ongoing monitoring and development of good quality and consistent care across Australia.

Hospitalizations and Mortality of Individuals with Dementia: Evidence from Czech National Registers

BACKGROUND

Facing an increasing prevalence of dementia, the Czech Republic is developing a new nationwide strategy for the management and prevention of dementia. Lack of evidence about characteristics of individuals with dementia in the country is a major obstacle.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to 1) characterize individuals with dementia, 2) compare their mortality with the general population, and 3) analyze differences in survival between different dementia disorders.

METHODS

The study capitalizes on two nationwide registers in the Czech Republic, from which information about individuals who were hospitalized with dementia or died from it between 1994 and 2014 was retrieved. Standardized intensity of hospitalizations was calculated for each year, mortality was studied using standardized mortality ratio, life-tables, Kaplan-Mayer curves, and Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Standardized intensity of hospitalizations for dementia increased more than 3 times from 1994 to 2014. Standardized mortality ratio was 3.03 (95% confidence interval 2.97-3.08). One-year survival rate was 45% and five-year survival rate 16%. Vascular dementia was the most common type of dementia disorders and was associated with higher hazard of death than Alzheimer's disease, even after adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical covariates (hazard ratio 1.04; 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.05).

CONCLUSION

The study provides estimates on demographic characteristics and mortality of the Czech hospitalized dementia population, which have not been so far available and which are unique also in the context of the entire region of Central and Eastern Europe.

Quality indicators for community dementia care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of an up-to-date body of evidence and a comprehensive overview concerning literature on quality indicator (QI) development for dementia care. Therefore, we systematically reviewed recent literature and formulated recommendations for future research.

METHODS

PubMed, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library were searched for studies describing QI development or redefinition for dementia care (from first symptoms until admission to long-term care), published from 2008 to May 2019.

RESULTS

We included a total of 7 articles, comprising of 107 QIs. The majority of publications originated from Europe. These applied to outpatient care, primary care and end-of-life care. Most QIs referred to care processes. Several care domains were determined by the authors, ranging from screening and assessment to end-of-life care. The methodological quality of the QI sets differed considerably. The QI sets with the best methodological quality were developed using expert evaluation or a Delphi technique.

CONCLUSIONS

It can be concluded that a reasonable amount of QIs for assessing and optimizing community dementia care exists, however, further development and methodological improvements of these QIs are necessary. Involvement of people with dementia and caregivers in the development process and a broader focus including community oriented next to medically oriented QIs are examples of potential improvement measures.

Evaluation of Medicare Claims Data as a Tool to Identify Dementia

BACKGROUND

Medicare claims record linkage has been used to identify diagnosed dementia cases in order to estimate dementia prevalence and cost of care. Claims records in the 1990 s and early 2000 s have been found to provide 85% - ∼90% sensitivity and specificity.

OBJECTIVE

Considering that dementia awareness has improved over time, we sought to examine sensitivity and specificity of more recent Medicare claims records against a standard criterion, clinical diagnosis of dementia.

METHODS

For a sample of patients evaluated at the University of Southern California Alzheimer Disease Research Center (ADRC), we performed database linkage with Medicare claims files for a six-year period, 2007-2012. We used clinical diagnosis at the ADRC as the criterion diagnosis in order to calculate sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

Medicare claims correctly identified 85% of dementia patients and 77% of individuals with normal cognition. About half of patients clinically diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment had dementia diagnoses in Medicare claims. Misclassified dementia patients (i.e., missed diagnosis by Medicare claims) had more favorable Mini-Mental State Examination and Clinical Dementia Rating scores and were less likely to present behavioral symptoms than correctly-classified dementia patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Database linkage to Medicare claims records is an efficient and reasonably accurate tool to identify dementia cases in a population-based cohort. However, possibilities of obtaining biased results due to misclassification of dementia status need to be carefully considered to use Medicare claims diagnosis for etiologic research studies. Additional confirmation of dementia diagnosis may also be considered. A larger study is warranted to confirm our findings.

Dementia registries around the globe and their applications: A systematic review

Patient registries are valuable tools helping to address significant challenges in research, care, and policy. Registries, well embedded in many fields of medicine and public health, are relatively new in dementia. This systematic review presents the current situation in regards to dementia registries worldwide. We identified 31 dementia registries operating on an international, national, or local level between 1986 and 2016. More than half of the registries aimed to conduct or facilitate research, including preclinical research registries and registries recruiting research volunteers. Other dementia registries collected epidemiological or quality of care data. We present evidence of practical and economic outcomes of registries for research, clinical practice and policy, and recommendations for future development. Global harmonization of recruitment methods and minimum data would facilitate international comparisons. Registries provide a positive return on investment; their establishment and maintenance require ongoing support by government, policy makers, research funding bodies, clinicians, and individuals with dementia and their caregivers.

Dementia Diagnosis, Treatment, and Care in Specialist Clinics in Two Scandinavian Countries: A Data Comparison between the Swedish Dementia Registry (SveDem) and the Danish Dementia Registry

BACKGROUND

Two dementia quality registries have been developed in Denmark and Sweden with the aim to assess quality of dementia care based on adherence to national guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To compare patient characteristics, diagnostics, treatment, and quality indicators of dementia care among patients referred to specialist units in Sweden and Denmark.

METHODS

Data from the Swedish Dementia Registry (SveDem) and the Danish Dementia Registry were merged. Newly diagnosed dementia cases referred to memory clinics during 2007-2012 were included (19,629 Swedish and 6,576 Danish patients).

RESULTS

The median duration between initial assessment and confirmed diagnosis was 56 and 57 days in Sweden and Denmark, respectively. Brain imaging using MRI was twice as common in Sweden. A diagnosis of dementia was established at an average MMSE of 21. An etiological diagnosis was concluded in 89.6% of the Swedish and 87.3% of the Danish cases. Alzheimer's disease (AD) was the most common disorder (47.7% in Denmark and 36.6% in Sweden); however, more cases were diagnosed as mixed AD in Sweden (24.7% versus 10.6% ). More than 80% of patients with AD, dementia with Lewy bodies, and Parkinson's disease with dementia were treated with anti-dementia drugs.

CONCLUSION

The targets of several quality indicators in both registries were met, such that structural brain imaging and MMSE were performed in >90% and an etiological diagnosis was concluded in >80% of the patients. However, there were also results of concern. The diagnosis of dementia was established at a mean MMSE of 21, which is already late in the course of most dementia disorders. A higher chance of vascular findings following the higher rate of MRI in Sweden may have resulted in more mixed AD diagnosis, which could be one explanation for diagnostic differences but also highlights the need to harmonize diagnostic criteria.

The use of MRI, CT and lumbar puncture in dementia diagnostics: data from the SveDem Registry

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The use of structural brain imaging [computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)] and the analysis of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers are included in the guidelines for the diagnosis of dementia. The influence of variables such as age, gender and disease severity on the use of MRI, CT and lumbar puncture (LP) for the differential diagnosis of dementia and the consonance with the recommendations of the Swedish national guidelines were investigated.

METHODS

From the National Swedish Dementia Registry (SveDem), 17,057 newly diagnosed dementia patients were included in our study, with the majority from specialist care units (90%).

RESULTS

In the diagnostic workup, a CT was performed in 87%, MRI in 16% and LP in 40% of the cases. Age (p < 0.001) and cognitive status (p < 0.001) significantly influenced the use of MRI, CT or LP. Older patients with severe dementia were often investigated with CT. LP and MRI were used more often when less common dementia disorders were suspected.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that age, severity of cognitive impairment and the type of dementia disorder suspected are determinants for the choice of CT, MRI or LP. The majority of the dementia workups in specialist care units follow the recommendations of the Swedish national guidelines where CT is performed as a basic workup, and MRI and LP are chosen when extended workup is needed. .

SveDem, the Swedish Dementia Registry - a tool for improving the quality of diagnostics, treatment and care of dementia patients in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

The Swedish Dementia Registry (SveDem) was developed with the aim to improve the quality of diagnostic work-up, treatment and care of patients with dementia disorders in Sweden.

METHODS

SveDem is an internet based quality registry where several indicators can be followed over time. It includes information about the diagnostic work-up, medical treatment and community support (www.svedem.se). The patients are diagnosed and followed-up yearly in specialist units, primary care centres or in nursing homes.

RESULTS

The database was initiated in May 2007 and covers almost all of Sweden. There were 28 722 patients registered with a mean age of 79.3 years during 2007-2012. Each participating unit obtains continuous online statistics from its own registrations and they can be compared with regional and national data. A report from SveDem is published yearly to inform medical and care professionals as well as political and administrative decision-makers about the current quality of diagnostics, treatment and care of patients with dementia disorders in Sweden.

CONCLUSION

SveDem provides knowledge about current dementia care in Sweden and serves as a framework for ensuring the quality of diagnostics, treatment and care across the country. It also reflects changes in quality dementia care over time. Data from SveDem can be used to further develop the national guidelines for dementia and to generate new research hypotheses.

Consensus on quality indicators to assess the organisation of palliative cancer and dementia care applicable across national healthcare systems and selected by international experts

Background

Large numbers of vulnerable patients are in need of palliative cancer and dementia care. However, a wide gap exists between the knowledge of best practices in palliative care and their use in everyday clinical practice. As part of a European policy improvement program, quality indicators (QIs) have been developed to monitor and improve the organisation of palliative care for patients with cancer and those with dementia in various settings in different European countries.

Method

A multidisciplinary, international panel of professionals participated in a modified RAND Delphi procedure to compose a set of palliative care QIs based on existing sets of QIs on the organisation of palliative care. Panellists participated in three written rounds, one feedback round and one meeting. The panel’s median votes were used to identify the final set of QIs.

Results

The Delphi procedure resulted in 23 useful QIs. These QIs represent key elements of the organisation of good clinical practice, such as the availability of palliative care teams, the availability of special facilities to provide palliative care for patients and their relatives, and the presence of educational interventions for professionals. The final set also includes QIs that are related to the process of palliative care, such as documentation of pain and other symptoms, communication with patients in need of palliative care and their relatives, and end-of-life decisions.

Conclusion

International experts selected a set of 23 QIs for the organisation of palliative care. Although we particularly focused on the organisation of cancer and dementia palliative care, most QIs are generic and are applicable for other types of diseases as well.