A nationwide survey of Italian centers for cognitive disorders and dementia on the provision of care for international migrants

A new national survey of centers for cognitive disorders and dementias in Italy

INTRODUCTION

A new national survey has been carried out by the Italian Centers for Cognitive Disorders and Dementias (CCDDs). The aim of this new national survey is to provide a comprehensive description of the characteristics, organizational aspects of the CCDDs, and experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A list of all national CCDDs was requested from the delegates of each Italian region. The online questionnaire is divided in two main sections: a profile section, containing information on location and accessibility, and a data collection form covering organization, services, treatments, activities, and any service interruptions caused by the COVID-19 outbreak.

RESULTS

In total, 511 out of 534 (96%) facilities completed the profile section, while 450 out of 534 (84%) CCDDs also completed the data collection form. Almost half of the CCDDs (55.1%) operated for 3 or fewer days a week. About one-third of the facilities had at least two professional figures among neurologists, geriatricians and psychiatrists. In 2020, only a third of facilities were open all the time, but in 2021, two-thirds of the facilities were open.

CONCLUSION

This paper provides an update on the current status of CCDDs in Italy, which still shows considerable heterogeneity. The survey revealed a modest improvement in the functioning of CCDDs, although substantial efforts are still required to ensure the diagnosis and care of patients with dementia.

Assessment of Dementia in Minority Ethnic Groups in Scotland: Results of a Survey of Cognitive Specialists

OBJECTIVE

Minority ethnic groups (MEGs) in Europe receive suboptimal dementia evaluation, yet related research in Scotland is lacking. This research examined the evaluation of dementia in MEGs in Scotland and compared it with previous research to highlight the changes in the clinical evaluation of dementia over the decade.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A self-administered survey was created online and emailed to 14 Heads of the boards under the Scottish National Health Service and dementia-associated settings and organizations.

RESULTS

Most surveyed centers (85.6%) received MEG referrals. Although 92.9% of the centers used professional translators when needed, 85.7% thought assessing dementia in MEGs was difficult, mostly due to the suitability of test instruments and rating scales and patients' linguistic abilities. Very few found their skills to be good in evaluating MEGs. There was no mention of specialized dementia services for MEGs.

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of culturally appropriate instruments and specialized dementia services reveals that the services are not ready to meet the demand for evaluating patients from diverse cultural and language backgrounds. Inadequate clinical evaluation may lead to misdiagnoses. Therefore, although significant work has been carried out in the past few years, improvements must be continued to enhance the current practices and apply suitable evaluation methods for MEGs.

Case Identification and Characterization of Migrants with Dementia in the Lazio Region Using Health Administrative Data

BACKGROUND

A crucial step for planning effective public health policies for migrants with dementia is the collection of data on the local dimensions of the phenomenon and patients' characteristics.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify and characterize migrants with dementia in the Lazio region using health administrative databases.

METHODS

Residents with dementia aged 50 years or older, living in the Lazio region as of December 31, 2018, were identified using a validated algorithm based on hospital discharge(s), claims for antidementia drugs, and co-payment exemption for dementia. Migrants were defined as people born abroad and grouped in migrants from High Migratory Pressure Countries (HMPCs) and Highly Developed Countries (HDCs). Overall and age-specific prevalence rates were estimated in native- and foreign-born patients.

RESULTS

Dementia was ascertained in 38,460 residents. Among them, 37,280 (96.9%) were born in Italy, 337 (0.9%) were migrants from HDCs, and 843 (2.2%) from HMPCs. Dementia prevalence was higher among natives (1.15%, 95% CI 1.14-1.16) relative to migrants from HDCs (0.60%, 95% CI 0.54-0.67) and HMPCs (0.29%, 95% CI 0.27-0.31). The prevalence of comorbidities did not differ between groups. Migrants with dementia had a lower likelihood of receiving antidementia treatments compared with natives (51.6% in migrants from HDCs, 49.3% in migrants from HMPCs, and 53.5% among Italians).

CONCLUSION

Routinely collected data in healthcare administrative databases can support the identification of migrants with dementia. Migrants exhibited a lower age-standardized prevalence of registered dementia and lower access to dedicated treatments than Italians. These findings are suggestive of underdiagnosis and undertreatment of dementia in migrants.