Diagnosing dementia in the Arctic: translating tools and developing and validating an algorithm for assessment of impaired cognitive function in Greenland Inuit

Diagnostic Accuracy of the Swedish Version of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS-S) for Multicultural Cognitive Screening in Swedish Memory Clinics

Background:

The number of people with a migration background and dementia is increasing in Europe. All patients with suspected dementia have the right to an appropriate cognitive assessment and correct diagnosis for optimal treatment and support. Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) cognitive screening instrument is less affected by language, culture, and educational background, and adapted for use in multicultural populations.

Objective:

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of RUDAS-S to the Swedish version of Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE-SR) for detecting dementia in a multicultural group of outpatients in Swedish memory clinics.

Methods:

We tested 123 outpatients (36 nonnative Swedish), in 4 memory clinics in Southern Sweden with RUDAS-S to supplement the usual cognitive assessment.

Results:

RUDAS-S had moderate to good diagnostic performance for detecting dementia in a multicultural population in Sweden, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.81. At a cutoff score <25 its sensitivity was 0.92, specificity 0.60, and accuracy 76%. The AUC for the MMSE-SR was 0.79. At a cutoff score <23 its sensitivity was 0.65, specificity 0.81, and accuracy 73%.

Conclusion:

RUDAS-S is at least as accurate as MMSE-SR for detecting dementia in memory clinics in Sweden and can be used for all patients undergoing a cognitive assessment, irrespective of their cultural, language, and educational background. However, there is a need for other cross-cultural cognitive tests to complement RUDAS-S to extend cognitive examination.

Cognitive Assessment in Culturally, Linguistically, and Educationally Diverse Older Populations in Europe

Due to increasing cultural, linguistic, and educational diversity in older populations across Europe, accurate assessment of cognitive functioning in people from diverse backgrounds becomes increasingly important. This paper aims to provide a state-of-the-art review of cognitive assessment in culturally, linguistically, and educationally diverse older populations in Europe, focusing on challenges and recent advances in cross-cultural assessment. Significant work has been carried out on the identification of challenges in cognitive assessment in culturally, linguistically, and educationally diverse older populations and on development and validation of cross-cultural cognitive tests. Most research has addressed the influences of language barriers, education and literacy, and culture and acculturation and in particular, the European Cross-Cultural Neuropsychological Test Battery (CNTB) and the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) are well-validated across European countries. However, cross-cultural cognitive assessment is largely still a developing field in Europe, and there is a continuing need for developments within the field.

Discrepancy between electronic medicine list, pharmacy delivery and patient reported medicine intake in Greenland

Medicine use is a cornerstone in the treatment of many conditions, but ill-use has the potential to harm the patient. Thus, accurate medication information is critical for patient care and safety. To investigate the association between participants’ reporting of using medicine daily, medicine list on Electronic Medical Record (EMR) and number of medicines handed out. Thirty-seven elderly Greenlanders were included, representing three different locations in Greenland. They were interviewed on daily medicine intake. Medicine list and pharmacy delivery were retrieved from the EMR. The difference between the number of drugs recorded in the EMR and the number delivered by pharmacy increased with number of drugs prescribed (p<0.0001). Thirty participants claimed that they were on daily medicine, and the EMR was in accordance with the delivered recorded by the pharmacy in just five participants. Eight had no registered medicine delivery. Four of seven, who claimed not being on daily medicine, were on daily medicine according to EMR. We found distinct discrepancies between EMR medicine list, medicine delivery by pharmacy and patient self-reported medicine use.