Could Early Identification of Changes in Olfactory Function Be an Indicator of Preclinical Neurodegenerative Disease? A Systematic Review

Abstract Introduction Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a debilitating neurodegenerative disease that currently affects 850,000 individuals in the UK with estimates continuing to rise. Diagnosis is only available in the presence of significant neuronal pathology and apparent cognitive decline, meaning that treatment avenues are often limited and carry little to no effect on prognosis. Olfactory function has been shown to have a direct correlation with cognitive function and therefore may serve as a potential diagnostic tool for the detection of preclinical disease. The objective was to examine the current literature to establish the accuracy of olfactory function testing in determining current and future cognitive function. Methods A systematic review was performed via Medline on 17 October 2019 using the search terms and Boolean operators ‘Dementia OR Alzheimer’s AND olfaction AND cognitive impairment’ yielding 111 results. These were then screened using inclusion/exclusion criteria alongside a PICO strategy. After titles, abstracts and full text were screened, nine articles were included in the review and critically appraised using the AXIS and CASP tools. Results Significant correlations are demonstrated between olfactory impairment (OI) and cognitive decline. However, there were limitations of many of the studies in that confounders such as head trauma, upper respiratory infection (URTI) and smoking history were not considered. The majority of the studies also used an olfactory screening tool that was not designed for the population being examined. Conclusion Despite improvements in olfactory testing needing to be implemented, OI is clearly impaired in neurodegenerative disease across a multitude of ages and cultures, offering an early marker of future cognitive decline. As a result of the heterogenous nature of the included studies, there is a further need for future research to ensure the sensitivity, validity and reliability of implementing olfactory testing as an early marker of future cognitive decline

Infection prevention and control challeneges of using a therapeutic robot

This work was part of a National Institute for Health Research participatory action research and practice development study, which focused on the use of a therapeutic, robotic baby seal (PARO, for personal assistive robot) in everyday practice in a single-site dementia unit in Sussex. From the beginning of January 2017 until the end of September 2017, the cleaning and cleanliness of PARO was monitored through a service audit process that focused on the cleaning, amount of use and testing of contamination of PARO being used in everyday clinical practice with individuals and in group sessions. Its use and cleaning followed protocols developed by the study team, which incorporated hand hygiene and standard precaution policies. Its cleanliness was determined using an adenosine triphosphate (ATP) luminometer, with a benchmark of 50 relative light units (RLU). A reading of ATP below 50RLU is the level of cleanliness recommended for social areas in hospital settings. Throughout the study period, monitoring showed that all swab zones on PARO were within the benchmark of the 50RLU threshold for cleanliness. PARO has an emerging evidence base as a useful therapeutic device. However, introducing such devices into clinical practice may encounter barriers or concerns from an infection prevention and control (IPC) perspective. This study of PARO in clinical practice aims to address the IPC concerns raised and offers cleaning and testing protocols and results

The PARO seal: weighing up

The PARO robotic seal can improve the wellbeing of people with dementia, but is it safe for use on hospital wards? Kathy Martyn and colleagues carried out research and found that it passed hygiene tests. But Carlene Rowson and her collaborators claim (opposite) that infection control concerns have not been adequately answered.In this debate, they argue the case for and against PARO on hospital wardsand her collaborators claim (opposite) that infection control concerns have not been adequately answered. In this debate, they argue the case for and against PARO on hospital wards

Time for nutrition in medical education.

AIM: To synthesise a selection of UK medical students' and doctors' views surrounding nutrition in medical education and practice. METHODS: Information was gathered from surveys of medical students and doctors identified between 2015 and 2018 and an evaluation of nutrition teaching in a single UK medical school. Comparative analysis of the findings was undertaken to answer three questions: the perceived importance of nutrition in medical education and practice, adequacy of nutrition training, and confidence in current nutrition knowledge and skills. RESULTS: We pooled five heterogeneous sources of information, representing 853 participants. Most agreed on the importance of nutrition in health (>90%) and in a doctor's role in nutritional care (>95%). However, there was less desire for more nutrition education in doctors (85%) and in medical students (68%). Most felt their nutrition training was inadequate, with >70% reporting less than 2 hours. There was a preference for face-to-face rather than online training. At one medical school, nutrition was included in only one module, but this increased to eight modules following an increased nutrition focus. When medical students were asked about confidence in their nutrition knowledge and on advising patients, there was an even split between agree and disagree (p=0.869 and p=0.167, respectively), yet few were confident in the UK dietary guidelines. Only 26% of doctors were confident in their nutrition knowledge and 74% gave nutritional advice less than once a month, citing lack of knowledge (75%), time (64%) and confidence (62%) as the main barriers. There was some recognition of the importance of a collaborative approach, yet 28% of doctors preferred to get specialist advice rather than address nutrition themselves. CONCLUSION: There is a desire and a need for more nutrition within medical education, as well as a need for greater clarity of a doctor's role in nutritional care and when to refer for specialist advice. Despite potential selection bias and limitations in the sampling frame, this synthesis provides a multifaceted snapshot via a large number of insights from different levels of training through medical students to doctors from which further research can be developed

Insights from a general practice service evaluation supporting a lower carbohydrate diet in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and prediabetes: a secondary analysis of routine clinic data including HbA1c, weight and prescribing over 6 years.

BACKGROUND: In a single general practice (GP) surgery in England, there was an eightfold increase in the prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in three decades with 57 cases and 472 cases recorded in 1987 and 2018, respectively. This mirrors the growing burden of T2D on the health of populations round the world along with healthcare funding and provision more broadly. Emerging evidence suggests beneficial effects of carbohydrate-restricted diets on glycaemic control in T2D, but its impact in a 'real-world' primary care setting has not been fully evaluated. METHODS: Advice on a lower carbohydrate diet was offered routinely to patients with newly diagnosed and pre-existing T2D or prediabetes between 2013 and 2019, in the Norwood GP practice with 9800 patients. Conventional 'one-to-one' GP consultations were used, supplemented by group consultations, to help patients better understand the glycaemic consequences of their dietary choices with a particular focus on sugar, carbohydrates and foods with a higher Glycaemic Index. Those interested were computer coded for ongoing audit to compare 'baseline' with 'latest follow-up' for relevant parameters. RESULTS: By 2019, 128 (27%) of the practice population with T2D and 71 people with prediabetes had opted to follow a lower carbohydrate diet for a mean duration of 23 months. For patients with T2D, the median (IQR) weight dropped from of 99.7 (86.2, 109.3) kg to 91.4 (79, 101.1) kg, p<0.001, while the median (IQR) HbA1c dropped from 65.5 (55, 82) mmol/mol to 48 (43, 55) mmol/mol, p<0.001. For patients with prediabetes, the median (IQR) HbA1c dropped from 44 (43, 45) mmol/mol to 39 (38, 41) mmol/mol, p<0.001. Drug-free T2D remission occurred in 46% of participants. In patients with prediabetes, 93% attained a normal HbA1c. Since 2015, there has been a relative reduction in practice prescribing of drugs for diabetes leading to a T2D prescribing budget £50 885 per year less than average for the area. CONCLUSIONS: This approach to lower carbohydrate dietary advice for patients with T2D and prediabetes was incorporated successfully into routine primary care over 6 years. There were statistically significant improvements in both groups for weight, HbA1c, lipid profiles and blood pressure as well as significant drug budget savings. These results suggest a need for more empirical research on the effects of lower carbohydrate diet and long-term glycaemic control while recording collateral impacts to other metabolic health outcomes