Accelerated forgetting in healthy older samples: Implications for methodology, future ageing studies, and early identification of risk of dementia

Accelerated long-term forgetting (ALF) has been reported in healthy older individuals, and is a possible early marker for risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The Verbal Associative Learning & Memory Test (VALMT; McGibbon & Jansari, 2013) addresses methodological weaknesses in existing clinical tests and has detected ALF in epilepsy within an hour. We used VALMT to investigate learning and forgetting in healthy older participants. Older (60-69yrs) and Younger (19-31yrs) participants were compared. Using VALMT, unrelated word-pairs were learnt to criterion, then cued-recall tested at delays of 5, 30 and 55 minutes. Unique pairs were tested at each delay. Subjective memory complaints data was gathered, and the Wechsler Memory Scale Logical Memory test (WMS-LM; a standard clinical measure) was administered. VALMT identified a significant difference in delayed recall between Younger and Older groups by 55 minutes (d = 1.32). While ‘fast-learning’ Older participants scored similarly to Younger participants, ‘slow-learning’ Older participants were impaired at all delays. Forgetting rates suggested degradation of memory starts during early synaptic consolidation rather than later system-level consolidation. Increased subjective memory complaints were associated with reduced VALMT scores. By contrast, WMS-LM failed to identify significant differences between any groups, and did not correlate with memory complaints. We conclude VALMT may be better able than WMS-LM to identify subtle impairments in healthy older adults within a single clinical visit, and VALMT results better reflect subjective experience. Older slow-learners forget faster and report more subjective memory complaints, which may indicate a group at risk of developing AD

Comparison of diagnoses of early-onset sepsis associated with use of Sepsis Risk Calculator versus NICE CG149: a prospective, population-wide cohort study in London, UK, 2020–2021

Objective We sought to compare the incidence of early-onset sepsis (EOS) in infants ≥34 weeks’ gestation identified >24 hours after birth, in hospitals using the Kaiser Permanente Sepsis Risk Calculator (SRC) with hospitals using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance.Design and setting Prospective observational population-wide cohort study involving all 26 hospitals with neonatal units colocated with maternity services across London (10 using SRC, 16 using NICE).Participants All live births ≥34 weeks’ gestation between September 2020 and August 2021.Outcome measures EOS was defined as isolation of a bacterial pathogen in the blood or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) culture from birth to 7 days of age. We evaluated the incidence of EOS identified by culture obtained >24 hours to 7 days after birth. We also evaluated the rate empiric antibiotics were commenced >24 hours to 7 days after birth, for a duration of ≥5 days, with negative blood or CSF cultures.Results Of 99 683 live births, 42 952 (43%) were born in SRC hospitals and 56 731 (57%) in NICE hospitals. The overall incidence of EOS (<72 hours) was 0.64/1000 live births. The incidence of EOS identified >24 hours was 2.3/100 000 (n=1) for SRC vs 7.1/100 000 (n=4) for NICE (OR 0.5, 95% CI (0.1 to 2.7)). This corresponded to (1/20) 5% (SRC) vs (4/45) 8.9% (NICE) of EOS cases (χ=0.3, p=0.59). Empiric antibiotics were commenced >24 hours to 7 days after birth in 4.4/1000 (n=187) for SRC vs 2.9/1000 (n=158) for NICE (OR 1.5, 95% CI (1.2 to 1.9)). 3111 (7%) infants received antibiotics in the first 24 hours in SRC hospitals vs 8428 (15%) in NICE hospitals.Conclusion There was no significant difference in the incidence of EOS identified >24 hours after birth between SRC and NICE hospitals. SRC use was associated with 50% fewer infants receiving antibiotics in the first 24 hours of life