Does a Family Meetings Intervention Prevent Depression and Anxiety in Family Caregivers of Dementia Patients? A Randomized Trial

Family caregivers of dementia patients are at increased risk of developing depression or anxiety. A multi-component program designed to mobilize support of family networks demonstrated effectiveness in decreasing depressive symptoms in caregivers. However, the impact of an intervention consisting solely of family meetings on depression and anxiety has not yet been evaluated. This study examines the preventive effects of family meetings for primary caregivers of community-dwelling dementia patients.A randomized multicenter trial was conducted among 192 primary caregivers of community dwelling dementia patients. Caregivers did not meet the diagnostic criteria for depressive or anxiety disorder at baseline. Participants were randomized to the family meetings intervention (n = 96) or usual care (n = 96) condition. The intervention consisted of two individual sessions and four family meetings which occurred once every 2 to 3 months for a year. Outcome measures after 12 months were the incidence of a clinical depressive or anxiety disorder and change in depressive and anxiety symptoms (primary outcomes), caregiver burden and quality of life (secondary outcomes). Intention-to-treat as well as per protocol analyses were performed.A substantial number of caregivers (72/192) developed a depressive or anxiety disorder within 12 months. The intervention was not superior to usual care either in reducing the risk of disorder onset (adjusted IRR 0.98; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.38) or in reducing depressive (randomization-by-time interaction coefficient = -1.40; 95% CI -3.91 to 1.10) or anxiety symptoms (randomization-by-time interaction coefficient = -0.55; 95% CI -1.59 to 0.49). The intervention did not reduce caregiver burden or their health related quality of life.This study did not demonstrate preventive effects of family meetings on the mental health of family caregivers. Further research should determine whether this intervention might be more beneficial if provided in a more concentrated dose, when applied for therapeutic purposes or targeted towards subgroups of caregivers.Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN90163486

Cognitive and memory training in adults at risk of dementia: A Systematic Review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Effective non-pharmacological cognitive interventions to prevent Alzheimer's dementia or slow its progression are an urgent international priority. The aim of this review was to evaluate cognitive training trials in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and evaluate the efficacy of training in memory strategies or cognitive exercises to determine if cognitive training could benefit individuals at risk of developing dementia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A systematic review of eligible trials was undertaken, followed by effect size analysis. Cognitive training was differentiated from other cognitive interventions not meeting generally accepted definitions, and included both cognitive exercises and memory strategies.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Ten studies enrolling a total of 305 subjects met criteria for cognitive training in MCI. Only five of the studies were randomized controlled trials. Meta-analysis was not considered appropriate due to the heterogeneity of interventions. Moderate effects on memory outcomes were identified in seven trials. Cognitive exercises (relative effect sizes ranged from .10 to 1.21) may lead to greater benefits than memory strategies (.88 to -1.18) on memory.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Previous conclusions of a lack of efficacy for cognitive training in MCI may have been influenced by not clearly defining the intervention. Our systematic review found that cognitive exercises can produce moderate-to-large beneficial effects on memory-related outcomes. However, the number of high quality RCTs remains low, and so further trials must be a priority. Several suggestions for the better design of cognitive training trials are provided.</p

Biophysical mechanisms of endotoxin neutralization by cationic amphiphilic peptides

Bacterial endotoxins (lipopolysaccharides (LPS)) are strong elicitors of the human immune system by interacting with serum and membrane proteins such as lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) and CD14 with high specificity. At LPS concentrations as low as 0.3 ng/ml, such interactions may lead to severe pathophysiological effects, including sepsis and septic shock. One approach to inhibit an uncontrolled inflammatory reaction is the use of appropriate polycationic and amphiphilic antimicrobial peptides, here called synthetic anti-LPS peptides (SALPs). We designed various SALP structures and investigated their ability to inhibit LPS-induced cytokine secretion in vitro, their protective effect in a mouse model of sepsis, and their cytotoxicity in physiological human cells. Using a variety of biophysical techniques, we investigated selected SALPs with considerable differences in their biological responses to characterize and understand the mechanism of LPS inactivation by SALPs. Our investigations show that neutralization of LPS by peptides is associated with a fluidization of the LPS acyl chains, a strong exothermic Coulomb interaction between the two compounds, and a drastic change of the LPS aggregate type from cubic into multilamellar, with an increase in the aggregate sizes, inhibiting the binding of LBP and other mammalian proteins to the endotoxin. At the same time, peptide binding to phospholipids of human origin (e.g., phosphatidylcholine) does not cause essential structural changes, such as changes in membrane fluidity and bilayer structure. The absence of cytotoxicity is explained by the high specificity of the interaction of the peptides with LPS

The accuracy of the MMSE in detecting cognitive impairment when administered by general practitioners: A prospective observational study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) has contributed to detecting cognitive impairment, yet few studies have evaluated its accuracy when used by general practitioners (GP) in an actual public-health setting.</p> <p>Objectives</p> <p>We evaluated the accuracy of MMSE scores obtained by GPs by comparing them to scores obtained by Alzheimer's Evaluation Units (UVA).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study was observational in design and involved 59 voluntary GPs who, after having undergone training, administered the MMSE to patients with symptoms of cognitive disturbances. Individuals who scored ≤ 24 (adjusted by age and educational level) were referred to Alzheimer's Evaluation Units (UVA) for diagnosis (including the MMSE). UVAs were unblinded to the MMSE score of the GP. To measure interrater agreement, the weighted Kappa statistic was calculated. To evaluate factors associated with the magnitude of the difference between paired scores, a linear regression model was applied. To quantify the accuracy in discriminating no cognitive impairment from any cognitive impairment and from Alzheimer's disease (AD), the ROC curves (AUC) were calculated.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For the 317 patients, the mean score obtained by GPs was significantly lower (15.8 vs. 17.4 for the UVAs; p < 0.01). However, overall concordance was good (Kappa = 0.86). Only the diagnosis made by the UVA was associated with the difference between paired scores: the adjusted mean difference was 3.1 for no cognitive impairment and 3.8 for mild cognitive impairment. The AUC of the scores for GPs was 0.80 (95%CI: 0.75–0.86) for discriminating between no impairment and any impairment and 0.89 (95%CI: 0.84–0.94) for distinguishing patients with AD, though the UVA scores discriminated better.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In a public-health setting involving patients with symptoms of cognitive disturbances, the MMSE used by the GPs was sufficiently accurate to detect patients with cognitive impairment, particularly those with dementia.</p

Study protocol for the recreational stimulation for elders as a vehicle to resolve delirium superimposed on dementia (Reserve For DSD) trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Delirium is a state of confusion characterized by an acute and fluctuating decline in cognitive functioning. Delirium is common and deadly in older adults with dementia, and is often referred to as delirium superimposed on dementia, or DSD. Interventions that treat DSD are not well-developed because the mechanisms involved in its etiology are not completely understood. We have developed a theory-based intervention for DSD that is derived from the literature on cognitive reserve and based on our prior interdisciplinary work on delirium, recreational activities, and cognitive stimulation in people with dementia. Our preliminary work indicate that use of simple, cognitively stimulating activities may help resolve delirium by helping to focus inattention, the primary neuropsychological deficit in delirium. Our primary aim in this trial is to test the efficacy of Recreational Stimulation for Elders as a Vehicle to resolve DSD (RESERVE- DSD).</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This randomized repeated measures clinical trial will involve participants being recruited and enrolled at the time of admission to post acute care. We will randomize 256 subjects to intervention (RESERVE-DSD) or control (usual care). Intervention subjects will receive 30-minute sessions of tailored cognitively stimulating recreational activities for up to 30 days. We hypothesize that subjects who receive RESERVE-DSD will have: decreased severity and duration of delirium; greater gains in attention, orientation, memory, abstract thinking, and executive functioning; and greater gains in physical function compared to subjects with DSD who receive usual care. We will also evaluate potential moderators of intervention efficacy (lifetime of complex mental activities and APOE status). Our secondary aim is to describe the costs associated with RESERVE-DSD.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Our theory-based intervention, which uses simple, inexpensive recreational activities for delivering cognitive stimulation, is innovative because, to our knowledge it has not been tested as a treatment for DSD. This novel intervention for DSD builds on our prior delirium, recreational activity and cognitive stimulation research, and draws support from cognitive reserve theory.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01267682">NCT01267682</a></p

Individual Cognitive Stimulation Therapy for dementia (iCST): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Improving the quality of care for people with dementia and their carers has become a national priority in many countries. Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (CST) groups can be beneficial in improving cognition and quality of life for people with dementia. The aim of the current study is to develop and evaluate a home-based individual Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (iCST) programme for people with dementia which can be delivered by their family carer