Rapid appraisal of barriers to the diagnosis and management of patients with dementia in primary care: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The diagnosis of dementia in primary care is perceived as a problem across countries and systems, resulting in delayed recognition and adverse outcomes for patients and their carers. Improving its early detection is an area identified for development in the English National Dementia Strategy 2009; there are thought to be multiple benefits to the patient, family, and resources by doing this. The aim of this review was to carry out a rapid appraisal in order to inform the implementation of this policy.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>Publications in English up to August 2009 relating to barriers to the recognition of dementia, were identified by a broad search strategy, using electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and psycINFO. Exclusion criteria included non-English language, studies about pharmacological interventions or screening instruments, and settings without primary care.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Eleven empirical studies were found: 3 quantitative, 6 qualitative, and 2 with mixed methodologies. The main themes from the qualitative studies were found to be lack of support, time constraints, financial constraints, stigma, diagnostic uncertainty, and disclosing the diagnosis. Quantitative studies yielded diverse results about knowledge, service support, time constraints, and confidence. The factors identified in qualitative and quantitative studies were grouped into 3 categories: patient factors, GP factors and system characteristics.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Much can still be done in the way of service development and provision, GP training and education, and the eradication of stigma attached to dementia, to improve the early detection and management of dementia. Implementation of dementia strategies should include attention to all three categories of barriers. Further research should focus on their interaction, using different methods from studies to date.</p

Multidimensional Geriatric Assessment: Back to the Future Preclinical Disability as a Risk Factor for Falls in Community-Dwelling Older Adults

Background. Falls are common and serious problems in older adults. The goal of this study was to examine whether preclinical disability predicts incident falls in a European population of community-dwelling older adults. Methods. Secondary data analysis was performed on a population-based longitudinal study of 1644 community-dwelling older adults living in London, U.K.; Hamburg, Germany; Solothurn, Switzerland. Data were collected at baseline and 1-year follow-up using a self-administered multidimensional health risk appraisal questionnaire, including validated questions on falls, mobility disability status (high function, preclinical disability, task difficulty), and demographic and health-related characteristics. Associations were evaluated using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Results. Overall incidence of falls was 24%, and increased by worsening mobility disability status: high function (17%), preclinical disability (32%), task difficulty (40%), test-of-trend p <.003. In multivariate analysis adjusting for other fall risk factors, preclinical disability (odds ratio [OR] = 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.5), task difficulty (OR = 1.7, 95% CI, 1.1-2.6) and history of falls (OR = 4.7, 95% CI, 3.5-6.3) were the strongest significant predictors of falls. In stratified multivariate analyses, preclinical disability equally predicted falls in participants with (OR = 1.7, 95% CI, 1.0-3.0) and without history of falls (OR = 1.8, 95% CI, 1.1-3.0). Conclusions. This study provides longitudinal evidence that self-reported preclinical disability predicts incident falls at 1-year follow-up independent of other self-reported fall risk factors. Multidimensional geriatric assessment that includes preclinical disability may provide a unique early warning system as well as potential targets for interventio

Interpreting population reach of a large, successful physical activity trial delivered through primary care.

Abstract Background Failure to include socio-economically deprived or ethnic minority groups in physical activity (PA) trials may limit representativeness and could lead to implementation of interventions that then increase health inequalities. Randomised intervention trials often have low recruitment rates and rarely assess recruitment bias. A previous trial by the same team using similar methods recruited 30% of the eligible population but was in an affluent setting with few non-white residents and was limited to those over 60 years of age. Methods PACE-UP is a large, effective, population-based walking trial in inactive 45-75 year-olds that recruited through seven London general practices. Anonymised practice demographic data were available for all those invited, enabling investigation of inequalities in trial recruitment. Non-participants were invited to complete a questionnaire. Results From 10,927 postal invitations, 1150 (10.5%) completed baseline assessment. Participation rate ratios (95% CI), adjusted for age and gender as appropriate, were lower in men 0.59 (0.52, 0.67) than women, in those under 55 compared with those ≥65, 0.60 (0.51, 0.71), in the most deprived quintile compared with the least deprived 0.52 (0.39, 0.70) and in Asian individuals compared with whites 0.62 (0.50, 0.76). Black individuals were equally likely to participate as white individuals. Participation was also associated with having a co-morbidity or some degree of health limitation. The most common reasons for non-participation were considering themselves as being too active or lack of time. Conclusions Conducting the trial in this diverse setting reduced overall response, with lower response in socio-economically deprived and Asian sub-groups. Trials with greater reach are likely to be more expensive in terms of recruitment and gains in generalizability need to be balanced with greater costs. Differential uptake of successful trial interventions may increase inequalities in PA levels and should be monitored

PACE-UP (Pedometer and consultation evaluation--UP)--a pedometer-based walking intervention with and without practice nurse support in primary care patients aged 45-75 years: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most adults do not achieve the 150 minutes weekly of at least moderate intensity activity recommended for health. Adults' most common physical activity (PA) is walking, light intensity if strolling, moderate if brisker. Pedometers can increase walking; however, most trials have been short-term, have combined pedometer and support effects, and have not reported PA intensity. This trial will investigate whether pedometers, with or without nurse support, can help less active 45-75 year olds to increase their PA over 12 months. METHODS/DESIGN: DESIGN: Primary care-based 3-arm randomized controlled trial with 12-month follow-up and health economic and qualitative evaluations. PARTICIPANTS: Less active 45-75 year olds (n = 993) will be recruited by post from six South West London general practices, maximum of two per household and households randomised into three groups. Step-count and time spent at different PA intensities will be assessed for 7 days at baseline, 3 and 12 months by accelerometer. Questionnaires and anthropometric assessments will be completed. INTERVENTION: The pedometer-alone group will be posted a pedometer (Yamax Digi-Walker SW-200), handbook and diary detailing a 12-week pedometer-based walking programme, using targets from their baseline assessment. The pedometer-plus-support group will additionally receive three practice nurse PA consultations. The handbook, diary and consultations include behaviour change techniques (e.g., self-monitoring, goal-setting, relapse prevention planning). The control group will receive usual care. OUTCOMES: Changes in average daily step-count (primary outcome), time spent sedentary and in at least moderate intensity PA weekly at 12 months, measured by accelerometry. Other outcomes include change in body mass index, body fat, self-reported PA, quality of life, mood and adverse events. Cost-effectiveness will be assessed by the incremental cost of the intervention to the National Health Service and incremental cost per change in step-count and per quality adjusted life year. Qualitative evaluations will explore reasons for trial non-participation and the interventions' acceptability. DISCUSSION: The PACE-UP trial will determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a pedometer-based walking intervention delivered by post or practice nurse to less active primary care patients aged 45-75 years old. Approaches to minimise bias and challenges anticipated in delivery will be discussed

How are falls and fear of falling associated with objectively measured physical activity in a cohort of community-dwelling older men?

BACKGROUND: Falls affect approximately one third of community-dwelling older adults each year and have serious health and social consequences. Fear of falling (FOF) (lack of confidence in maintaining balance during normal activities) affects many older adults, irrespective of whether they have actually experienced falls. Both falls and fear of falls may result in restrictions of physical activity, which in turn have health consequences. To date the relation between (i) falls and (ii) fear of falling with physical activity have not been investigated using objectively measured activity data which permits examination of different intensities of activity and sedentary behaviour. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of 1680 men aged 71-92 years recruited from primary care practices who were part of an on-going population-based cohort. Men reported falls history in previous 12 months, FOF, health status and demographic characteristics. Men wore a GT3x accelerometer over the hip for 7 days. RESULTS: Among the 12% of men who had recurrent falls, daily activity levels were lower than among non-fallers; 942 (95% CI 503, 1381) fewer steps/day, 12(95% CI 2, 22) minutes less in light activity, 10(95% CI 5, 15) minutes less in moderate to vigorous PA [MVPA] and 22(95% CI 9, 35) minutes more in sedentary behaviour. 16% (n = 254) of men reported FOF, of whom 52% (n = 133) had fallen in the past year. Physical activity deficits were even greater in the men who reported that they were fearful of falling than in men who had fallen. Men who were fearful of falling took 1766(95% CI 1391, 2142) fewer steps/day than men who were not fearful, and spent 27(95% CI 18, 36) minutes less in light PA, 18(95% CI 13, 22) minutes less in MVPA, and 45(95% CI 34, 56) minutes more in sedentary behaviour. The significant differences in activity levels between (i) fallers and non-fallers and (ii) men who were fearful of falling or not fearful, were mediated by similar variables; lower exercise self-efficacy, fewer excursions from home and more mobility difficulties. CONCLUSIONS: Falls and in particular fear of falling are important barriers to older people gaining health benefits of walking and MVPA. Future studies should assess the longitudinal associations between falls and physical activity

Feasibility of trial procedures for a randomised controlled trial of a community based group exercise intervention for falls prevention for visually impaired older people: the VIOLET study

Background Visually impaired older people (VIOP) have a higher risk of falling than their sighted peers, and are likely to avoid physical activity. The aim was to adapt the existing Falls Management Exercise (FaME) programme for VIOP, delivered in the community, and to investigate the feasibility of conducting a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) of this adapted intervention. Methods Two-centre randomised mixed methods pilot trial and economic evaluation of the adapted group-based FaME programme for VIOP versus usual care. A one hour exercise programme ran weekly over 12 weeks at the study sites (Newcastle and Glasgow), delivered by third sector (voluntary and community) organisations. Participants were advised to exercise at home for an additional two hours over the week. Those randomised to the usual activities group received no intervention. Outcome measures were completed at baseline, 12 and 24 weeks. The potential primary outcome was the Short Form Falls Efficacy Scale – International (SFES-I). Participants’ adherence was assessed by reviewing attendance records and self-reported compliance to the home exercises. Adherence with the course content (fidelity) by instructors was assessed by a researcher. Adverse events were collected in a weekly phone call. Results Eighteen participants, drawn from community-living VIOP were screened; 68 met the inclusion criteria; 64 participants were randomised with 33 allocated to the intervention and 31 to the usual activities arm. 94% of participants provided data at the 12 week visit and 92% at 24 weeks. Adherence was high. The intervention was found to be safe with 76% attending nine or more classes. Median time for home exercise was 50 min per week. There was little or no evidence that fear of falling, balance and falls risk, physical activity, emotional, attitudinal or quality of life outcomes differed between trial arms at follow-up. Conclusions The intervention, FaME, was implemented successfully for VIOP and all progression criteria for a main trial were met. The lack of difference between groups on fear of falling was unsurprising given it was a pilot study but there may have been other contributory factors including suboptimal exercise dose and apparent low risk of falls in participants. These issues need addressing for a future trial

“Keeping Moving”: factors associated with sedentary behaviour among older people recruited to an exercise promotion trial in general practice

Background Sedentary behaviour is detrimental to health, even in those who achieve recommended levels of physical activity. Efforts to increase physical activity in older people so that they reach beneficial levels have been disappointing. Reducing sedentary behaviour may improve health and be less demanding of older people, but it is not clear how to achieve this. We explored the characteristics of sedentary older people enrolled into an exercise promotion trial to gain insights about those who were sedentary but wanted to increase activity. Method Participants in the ProAct65+ trial (2009–2013) were categorised as sedentary or not using a self-report questionnaire. Demographic data, health status, self-rated function and physical test performance were examined for each group. 1104 participants aged 65 & over were included in the secondary analysis of trial data from older people recruited via general practice. Results were analysed using logistic regression with stepwise backward elimination. Results Three hundred eighty seven (35 %) of the study sample were characterised as sedentary. The likelihood of being categorised as sedentary increased with an abnormal BMI (25 kg/m2) (Odds Ratio 1.740, CI 1.248–2.425), ever smoking (OR 1.420, CI 1.042–1.934) and with every additional medication prescribed (OR 1.069, CI 1.016–1.124). Participants reporting better self-rated physical health (SF-12) were less likely to be sedentary; (OR 0.961, 0.936–0.987). Participants’ sedentary behaviour was not associated with gender, age, income, education, falls, functional fitness, quality of life or number of co-morbidities. Conclusion Some sedentary older adults will respond positively to an invitation to join an exercise study. Those who did so in this study had poor self-rated health, abnormal BMI, a history of smoking, and multiple medication use, and are therefore likely to benefit from an exercise intervention

Effect of pedometer-based walking interventions on long-term health outcomes: prospective 4-year follow-up of two randomised controlled trials using routine primary care data

© 2019 Harris et al. Background: Data are lacking from physical activity (PA) trials with long-term follow-up of both objectively measured PA levels and robust health outcomes. Two primary care 12-week pedometer-based walking interventions in adults and older adults (PACE-UP and PACE-Lift) found sustained objectively measured PA increases at 3 and 4 years, respectively. We aimed to evaluate trial intervention effects on long-term health outcomes relevant to walking interventions, using routine primary care data. Methods and Findings: Randomisation was from October 2012-November 2013 for PACE-UP participants from seven general (family) practices and October 2011-October 2012 for PACE-Lift participants from three practices. We downloaded primary care data, masked to intervention or control status, for 1001 PACE-UP participants age 45-75 years, 36% (361) male and 296 PACE-Lift participants, age 60-75 years, 46% (138) male, who gave written informed consent, for 4-year periods following randomisation. The following new events were counted for all participants, including those with pre-existing diseases (apart from diabetes, where existing cases were excluded): non-fatal cardiovascular; total cardiovascular (including fatal); incident diabetes; depression; fractures; and falls. Intervention effects on time to first event post-randomisation were modelled using Cox regression for all outcomes, except for falls, which used Negative Binomial regression to allow for multiple events, adjusting for age, sex, and study. Absolute risk reductions (ARRs) and numbers needed to treat (NNT) were estimated. Data were downloaded for 1297 (98%) of 1321 trial participants. Event rates were low (<20 per group) for outcomes, apart from fractures and falls. Cox Hazard ratios for time-to-first event post-randomisation for interventions versus controls were: non-fatal cardiovascular 0·24 (95% CI 0·07 to 0·77, p=0.02); total cardiovascular 0.34 (0.12 to 0.91, p=0.03); diabetes 0·75 (0·42 to 1·36, p=0.34); depression 0·98 (0·46 to 2·07, p=0.96); and fractures 0·56 (0·35 to 0·90, p=0.02). Negative binomial incident rate ratio for falls was 1.07 (95% CI 0·78–1·46, p=0.67). ARR and NNT (95% CI) for cardiovascular events were: non-fatal 1.7% (0.5% to 2.1%), NNT=59 (48 to 194); total 1.6% (0.2% to 2.2%), NNT=61 (46 to 472); and for fractures 3.6% (0.8% to 5.4%), NNT 28 (19 to 125). Main limitations were that event rates were low and only events recorded in primary care records were counted, however any under-recording would not have differed by intervention status, so should not have led to bias. Discussion: Routine primary care data used to assess long-term trial outcomes demonstrated significantly fewer new cardiovascular events and fractures in intervention participants at 4 years. No statistically significant differences between intervention and control groups were demonstrated for other events. Short-term primary care pedometer-based walking interventions can produce long-term health benefits and should be more widely used to help address the public health inactivity challenge. Trial Registrations: PACE-UP isrctn.com ISRCTN98538934; PACE-Lift isrctn.com ISRCTN42122561.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) UK: PACE-UP trial and 3-year follow-up by the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme NIHR (grant number 10/32/02); PACE-Lift trial by the Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB) Programme NIHR (grant number PB-PG-0909-20055); the PACE-UP 3-year follow-up was also supported by the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) South London