Quality of dementia clinical guidelines and relevance to the care of older people with comorbidity: evidence from the literature

Multidimensional screening and intervention program for neurocognitive disorder in vascular and multimorbid outpatients: Study protocol for a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The heightened risk of dementia resulting from multiple comorbid conditions calls for innovative strategies. Engaging in physical and cognitive activities emerges as a protective measure against cognitive decline. This protocol aims to discuss a multidomain intervention targeting individuals with dementias secondary to cerebrovascular or other medical diseases, emphasizing an often underrepresented demographic.

METHODS

This study primary objectives are: a) to identify patients affected by Neurocognitive disorder due to vascular disease or multiple etiologies (screening and diagnostic phase) and b) to evaluate the effectiveness of distinct rehabilitation protocols (intervention phase): motor training alone, paper-based cognitive rehabilitation combined with motor training, digital-based cognitive rehabilitation coupled with motor training.

DISCUSSION

Identifying cognitive impairment beyond rigid neurological contexts can facilitate timely and targeted interventions. This protocol strives to address the complex interplay of cognitive decline and comorbidities through a multidimensional approach, providing insights that can shape future interventions and enhancing overall well-being in this vulnerable population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study has been registered on July 13, 2023 with the ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05954741 registration number (https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05954741).

Trends in prevalence and incidence of registered dementia and trends in multimorbidity among patients with dementia in general practice in Flanders, Belgium, 2000-2021: a registry-based, retrospective, longitudinal cohort study

OBJECTIVES

With the ageing of our population, it seems plausible that the prevalence of both dementia and multimorbidity will increase in the following decades. The aim of this study is to examine the trends in prevalence and incidence of registered dementia and trends in multimorbidity in patients with dementia in general practice in Flanders.

DESIGN

Retrospective, longitudinal cohort study.

SETTING

Primary care practices across Flanders, Belgium.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients included in the Intego database.

METHODS

Data were collected from the Intego database, a Belgian general practice registration network, from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2021. Joinpoint regression, the Cochran-Armitage test and Jonckheere-Terpstra test were used for the trend analysis.

RESULTS

Data from 149 492 unique patients aged 65 years and older were available. From 2000 to 2021, 3835 incident cases of dementia were found. The age-adjusted prevalence of registered dementia significantly increased during this study period, from 1.19% to 2.43% (average annual percentage change (AAPC) 3.3; 95% CI 2.7 to 4.0). Incidence increased from 3.68 to 5.86 per 1000 patient years overall (AAPC 1.8, 95% CI -2.0 to 5.7), but declined in recent years (annual percentage change -8.1, 95% CI -14.8 to -0.8). Almost three-quarters of the patients with dementia (74.8%) suffered from multimorbidity (three or more comorbidities) and this increased significantly during the study period (p=0.0031). By 2021, 86.7% and 74.8% of the patients with dementia suffered from two or more or three or more chronic conditions, respectively. Hypertension (47.9%), osteoarthritis (29.7%) and lipid metabolism disorders (25.7%) were the most prevalent conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of registered dementia doubled over a 22-year time period, mirroring the increasing health burden by this disease globally. Furthermore, three-quarters of the patients with dementia suffered from multimorbidity, underlining the urgent need to implement comorbidity management and patient-centred care in dementia.

Conceptualising comorbidity and multimorbidity in dementia: A scoping review and syndemic framework

Background

Older people and people with dementia experience a high prevalence of multiple health conditions. The terms 'comorbidity' and 'multimorbidity' are often used interchangeably to describe this, however there are key conceptual differences between these terms and their definitions. This has led to issues in the validity and comparability of research findings, potentially inappropriate intervention development and differences in quality of health care.

Objective

To review how the terms 'comorbidity' and 'multimorbidity' are defined within peer-reviewed dementia research and propose an operational framework.

Design

A scoping review of definitions within dementia research was carried out. Searches took place across five databases: Academic Search Premier, CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE, PsycARTICLES and PsycINFO. PRISMA-ScR guidelines were followed.

Results

Content analysis revealed five key themes, showing significant overlap and inconsistencies from both within, and between, the comorbidity and multimorbidity definitions; 1. Number of conditions; 2. Type of health conditions; 3. The co-occurrence of conditions; 4. The inclusion of an index disease (or not); 5. Use of medical language. The analysis also revealed gaps in how the underlying concepts of the definitions relate to people with dementia living with multiple health conditions.

Conclusion

This scoping review found that current definitions of comorbidity and multimorbidity are heterogeneous, reductionist and disease-focussed. Recommendations are made on the design of research studies including transparency and consistency of any terms and definitions used. A syndemic framework could be a useful tool for researchers, clinicians and policy makers to consider a more holistic picture of a person with dementia's health and wellbeing.

Appraisal of the current guidelines for the management of diverticular disease using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument

INTRODUCTION

Diverticular disease is one of the most frequent reasons for attending emergency departments and surgical causes of hospital admission. In the past decade, many surgical and gastroenterological societies have published guidelines for the management of diverticular disease. The aim of the present study was to appraise the methodological quality of these guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar databases were searched systematically. The methodological quality of the guidelines was appraised independently by five appraisers using the AGREE II instrument.

FINDINGS

A systematic search of the literature identified 12 guidelines. The median overall score of all guidelines was 68%. Across all guidelines, the highest score of 85% was demonstrated in the domain 'Scope and purpose'. The domains 'Clarity and presentation' and 'Editorial independence' both scored a median of 72%. The lowest scores were demonstrated in the domains 'Stakeholder involvement' and 'Applicability' at 46% and 40%, respectively. Overall, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines performed consistently well, scoring 100% in five of six domains; NICE was one of the few guidelines that specifically reported stakeholder involvement, scoring 97%. Generally, the domain of 'Stakeholder involvement' ranked poorly with seven of twelve guidelines scoring below 50%, with the worst score in this domain demonstrated by Danish guidelines at 25%.

CONCLUSION

Six of twelve guidelines (NICE, American Society of Colon & Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), American Gastroenterological Association, German Society of Gastroenterology/German Society for General and Visceral Surgery (German), Netherlands Society of Surgery) scored above 70%. Only three, NICE, ASCRS and ESCP, scored above 75% and were voted unanimously by the appraisers for use as they are. Therefore, use of AGREE II may help improve the methodological quality of guidelines and their future updates.

Complementary and alternative medicine recommendations for depression: a systematic review and assessment of clinical practice guidelines

BACKGROUND

Up to 50% of individuals diagnosed with depression are known to use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). The aim of this study was to identify the quantity and assess the quality of CAM recommendations in clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and/or management of depression in adults using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify depression guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched from 2008 to 2018. The Guidelines International Network and the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health websites were also searched. Eligible guidelines published by non-profit agencies on treatment of depression for adults were assessed with the AGREE II instrument twice, once for the overall guideline and once for the CAM sections.

RESULTS

From 931 unique search results, 19 guidelines mentioned CAM, of which 16 made CAM recommendations. Scaled domain percentages from highest to lowest were as follows (overall, CAM section): clarity of presentation (87.0, 66.1%), scope and purpose (80.9, 77.6%), stakeholder involvement (62.0, 44.3%), editorial independence (61.6, 61.6%), rigour of development (58.0, 52.0%), and applicability (42.2, 25.4%). Quality varied within and across guidelines. Only 1 of 16 guidelines was recommended without modifications for both its overall and CAM sections by both appraisers.

CONCLUSIONS

There are multiple depression guidelines containing CAM recommendations available and there are a comprehensive set of CAM therapy options for depression. The quality of guidelines varied within and across guidelines and the quality of CAM recommendations was generally lower than the overall recommendations in the guidelines for all domains except editorial independence. Generally, characteristics of guidelines, including the year of publication and region of development varied across the guidelines irrespective of quality. Guidelines with higher AGREE II scores can serve as a guide to facilitate communication between patients and medical professionals regarding CAM use for depression, while guidelines with lower scores could be improved in future updates using the AGREE II instrument as a guide.

Planning Ahead for Dementia Research Participation: Insights from a Survey of Older Australians and Implications for Ethics, Law and Practice

People with dementia have commonly been excluded from research. The adverse impacts of this exclusion are now being recognized and research literature, position statements, and ethics guidelines increasingly call for inclusion of people with dementia in research. However, few published studies investigate the views of potential participants on taking part in research should they experience dementia-related cognitive impairment. This cross-sectional survey examined the views of people aged sixty and older (n=174) attending hospital outpatient clinics about clinical research participation if they had dementia and impaired decision-making ability. Over 90 percent of respondents were agreeable to participating in a wide range of research activities, such as cognitive testing, physical measurements, imaging procedures, and blood draws. For drug studies, however, agreement dropped to 60 percent. Altruism was a strong motivator for research participation. In regard to who should be involved in decisions about their participation in research during periods of incapacity, respondents mostly preferred the person they appoint as their substitute decision-maker for healthcare matters (88%) or a doctor or health professional on the research team (78%). Over three-quarters (79%) expressed interest in making an advance research directive. The study findings are discussed in relation to law reforms in Australia that aim to strengthen respect and inclusion for people with impaired decision-making capacity, especially by providing frameworks for advance planning for research participation.

Guidance on guidelines: Understanding the evidence on the uptake of health care guidelines

RATIONALE

Regardless of health issue, health sector, patient condition, or treatment modality, the chances are that provision is supported by "a guideline" making professionally endorsed recommendations on best practice. Against this background, research has proliferated seeking to evaluate how effectively such guidance is followed. These investigations paint a gloomy picture with many a guideline prompting lip service, inattention, and even opposition. This predicament has prompted a further literature on how to improve the uptake of guidelines, and this paper considers how to draw together lessons from these inquiries.

METHODS

This huge body of material presents a considerable challenge for research synthesis, and this paper produces a critical, methodological comparison of 2 types of review attempting to meet that task. Firstly, it provides an overview of the current orthodoxy, namely, "thematic reviews," which aggregate and enumerate the "barriers and facilitators" to guideline implementation. It then outlines a "realist synthesis," focussing on testing the "programme theories" that practitioners have devised to improve guideline uptake.

RESULTS

Thematic reviews aim to provide a definitive, comprehensive catalogue of the facilitators and barriers to guideline implementation. As such, they present a restatement of the underlying problems rather than an improvement strategy. The realist approach assumes that the incorporation of any guideline into current practice will produce unintended system strains as different stakeholders wrestle over responsibilities. These distortions will prompt supplementary revisions to guidelines, which in turn beget further strains. Realist reviews follow this dynamic understanding of organisational change.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care decision makers operate in systems that are awash with guidelines. But guidelines only have paper authority. Managers do not need a checklist of their pros and cons, because the fate of guidelines depends on their reception rather than their production. They do need decision support on how to engineer and reengineer guidelines so they dovetail with evolving systems of health care delivery.

Unlicensed medicines use: a UK guideline analysis using AGREE II

Objectives

There is widespread use of unlicensed medicines within primary and secondary care but little information is available around how these medicines are used. This analysis examines and evaluates the content and quality of relevant guidance documentation currently in use within the UK.

Methods

Guidance documents were identified through a literature search as well as email requests to pharmacy organisations throughout the UK. Unlicensed medicine documentation suitable for inclusion in the analysis underwent thematic analysis and quality assessment using the AGREE II tool.

Key findings

Thematic analysis of 52 guidelines revealed four parent themes: (1) Professional responsibility (2) Usage practicalities (3) Risk versus benefit (4) Controlling use. There was variability in scores across the AGREE II domains with areas covering Scope and Purpose and Clarity of Presentation scoring well. Conversely, an area needing attention was Rigour of Development.

Conclusion

Healthcare organisations would benefit from agreeing a ‘core content’ for the development of unlicensed medicines guidelines to ensure consistency and the presence of robust operating systems to deliver safe, effective treatment to all NHS patients.

Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines during Dementia Work-Up in a Real-World Setting: A Study from the Registry of Dementias of Girona

BACKGROUND

There are several position statements and clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for diagnosing dementia.

OBJECTIVE

Our aims were to evaluate the adherence to CPG among specialists in the 7 memory clinics included in the Registry of Dementias of Girona (ReDeGi), and to compare the results between 2007-2011 and 2012-2015. We also determined the time and number of visits required to achieve a diagnosis, the supplementary tests ordered, and the drugs prescribed according to dementia subtypes.

METHODS

Medical charts of a stratified random sample of 475 ReDeGi cases were reviewed. Basic dementia work-up was evaluated using as a reference evidence-based CPG. An Index of Adherence (AI) was calculated using the following items in the medical chart: cognitive symptomatology; functional disability evaluation; physical examination; neurological examination; psychiatric examination; brief cognitive examination; activities of daily living performance examination; blood test; structural neuroimaging (CT-scan or MRI).

RESULTS

The mean AI to CPG among specialists was of 8.2 points, and it improved from 7.9 points in 2007-2011 to 8.5 points in 2012-2015 (Cohen's d = 0.46). A lower adherence was detected in the most severe cases. A dementia diagnosis required 3.5 visits, regardless of the subtype of dementia, although milder cases required more time, more visits, and more supplementary tests than severe cases.

CONCLUSION

The adherence to CPG in the catchment area of the ReDeGi is high, and an epidemiological surveillance system such as the ReDeGi may help in improving it. Dementia guidelines should establish procedures adapted to clinical practice, with simplified recommendations for most severe cases.

Guideline appraisal with AGREE II: Systematic review of the current evidence on how users handle the 2 overall assessments

INTRODUCTION

The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument is the most commonly used guideline appraisal tool. It includes 23 appraisal criteria (items) organized within 6 domains and 2 overall assessments (1. overall guideline quality; 2. recommendation for use). The aim of this systematic review was twofold. Firstly, to investigate how often AGREE II users conduct the 2 overall assessments. Secondly, to investigate the influence of the 6 domain scores on each of the 2 overall assessments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic bibliographic search was conducted for publications reporting guideline appraisals with AGREE II. The impact of the 6 domain scores on the overall assessment of guideline quality was examined using a multiple linear regression model. Their impact on the recommendation for use (possible answers: "yes", "yes, with modifications", "no") was examined using a multinomial regression model.

RESULTS

118 relevant publications including 1453 guidelines were identified. 77.1% of the publications reported results for at least one overall assessment, but only 32.2% reported results for both overall assessments. The results of the regression analyses showed a statistically significant influence of all domains on overall guideline quality, with Domain 3 (rigour of development) having the strongest influence. For the recommendation for use, the results showed a significant influence of Domains 3 to 5 ("yes" vs. "no") and Domains 3 and 5 ("yes, with modifications" vs. "no").

CONCLUSIONS

The 2 overall assessments of AGREE II are underreported by guideline assessors. Domains 3 and 5 have the strongest influence on the results of the 2 overall assessments, while the other domains have a varying influence. Within a normative approach, our findings could be used as guidance for weighting individual domains in AGREE II to make the overall assessments more objective. Alternatively, a stronger content analysis of the individual domains could clarify their importance in terms of guideline quality. Moreover, AGREE II should require users to transparently present how they conducted the assessments.

An Overview of Systematic Reviews of Ginkgo biloba Extracts for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia

Ginkgo biloba extracts (GBEs) have been recommended to improve cognitive function and to prevent cognitive decline, but earlier evidence was inconclusive. Here, we evaluated all systematic reviews of GBEs for prevention of cognitive decline, and intervention of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. Six databases from their inception to September 2015 were searched. Ten systematic reviews were identified, including reviews about Alzheimer's disease (n = 3), about vascular dementia (n = 1), about both Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia (n = 2), about Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia and mixed dementia (n = 3), and a review about MCI (n = 1). Based on the overview quality assessment questionnaire, eight studies were scored with at least 5 points, while the other two scored 4 points and 3 points, respectively. Medication with GBEs showed improvement in cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and daily activities, and the effect was dose-dependent. Efficacy was convincingly demonstrated only when high daily dose (240 mg) was applied. Compared with placebo, overall adverse events and serious adverse events were at the same level as placebo, with less adverse events in favor of GBE in the subgroup of Alzheimer's disease patients, and fewer incidences in vertigo, tinnitus, angina pectoris, and headache. In conclusion, there is clear evidence to support the efficacy of GBEs for MCI and dementia, whereas the question on efficacy to prevent cognitive decline is still open. In addition, GBEs seem to be generally safe.

Are we providing the best possible care for dementia patients?

SUMMARY 

Healthcare for patients with dementia is often reactive, poorly organized and fragmented. We discuss opportunities for improvements in the care of individuals living with dementia at home that can be implemented by physicians in their practices today. In particular, we argue that systematic identification and diagnosis of cognitive impairment and dementia in their early stages, coupled with a coherent, evidence-informed management framework, would benefit patients with dementia substantially and ease the burden of their caregivers. We emphasize that dementia influences all aspects of patient care, and each medical decision must be passed through the filter of knowledge that patients with dementia have special needs that can be identified and addressed.