The Role of Innate APOBEC3G and Adaptive AID Immune Responses in HLA-HIV/SIV Immunized SHIV Infected Macaques

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

Dementia Caregiver Burden: A Research Update and Critical Analysis

Purpose of Review: This article provides an updated review of the determinants of caregiver burden and depression, with a focus on care demands and especially the differential effects of various neuropsychiatric symptoms or symptom clusters. Moreover, studies on caregivers for frontotemporal and Lewy body dementias were referred to in order to identify differences and similarities with the mainstream literature based largely on Alzheimer caregivers. Recent Findings: As a group, neuropsychiatric symptoms are most predictive of caregiver burden and depression regardless of dementia diagnosis, but the effects appear to be driven primarily by disruptive behaviors (e.g., agitation, aggression, disinhibition), followed by delusions and mood disturbance. Disruptive behaviors are more disturbing partly because of the adverse impact on the emotional connection between the caregiver and the care-recipient and partly because they exacerbate difficulties in other domains (e.g., caring for activities of daily living). In behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia, not only are these disruptive behaviors more prominent but they are also more disturbing due to the care-recipient’s insensitivity to others’ feelings. In Lewy body dementia, visual hallucinations also appear to be distressing. Summary: The disturbing nature of disruptive behaviors cuts across dementia conditions, but the roles played by symptoms that are unique or particularly serious in a certain condition need to be explored further

WHEDA study: Effectiveness of occupational therapy at home for older people with dementia and their caregivers - the design of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial evaluating a Dutch programme in seven German centres

Contains fulltext : 80941.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: A recent Dutch mono-centre randomised controlled trial has shown that occupational therapy improves daily functioning in dementia. The aim of this present study is to compare the effects of the Dutch community occupational therapy programme with a community occupational therapy consultation on daily functioning in older people with mild or moderate dementia and their primary caregivers in a German multi-centre context. METHODS/DESIGN: A multi-centre single blind randomised controlled trial design is being used in seven health care centres (neurological, psychiatric and for older people) in urban regions. Patients are 1:1 randomised to treatment or control group. Assessors are blind to group assignment and perform measurements on both groups at baseline, directly after intervention at 6 weeks and at 16, 26 and 52 weeks follow-up. A sample of 140 community dwelling older people (aged >65 years) with mild or moderate dementia and their primary caregivers is planned. The experimental intervention consists of an evidence-based community occupational therapy programme including 10 sessions occupational therapy at home. The control intervention consists of one community occupational therapy consultation based on information material of the Alzheimer Society. Providers of both interventions are occupational therapists experienced in treatment of cognitively impaired older people and trained in both programmes. 'Community' indicates that occupational therapy intervention occurs in the person's own home. The primary outcome is patients' daily functioning assessed with the performance scale of the Interview for Deterioration in Daily Living Activities in Dementia and video tapes of daily activities rated by external raters blind to group assignment using the Perceive, Recall, Plan and Perform System of Task Analysis. Secondary outcomes are patients' and caregivers' quality of life, mood and satisfaction with treatment; the caregiver's sense of competence, caregiver's diary (medication, resource utilisation, time of informal care); and the incidence of long-term institutionalisation. Process evaluation is performed by questionnaires and focus group discussion. DISCUSSION: The transfer from the Dutch mono-centre design to the pragmatic multi-site trial in a German context implicates several changes in design issues including differences in recruitment time, training of interventionists and active control group treatment.The study is registered under DRKS00000053 at the German register of clinical trials, which is connected to the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform

How transitions in dementia care trajectories affect health problems in partners:A longitudinal analysis with linked health and administrative data

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether the prevalence of health problems in cohabiting partners of people with dementia differs between the year before and the year after three transitions: the diagnosis of dementia, institutionalization and the death of the person with dementia. METHODS: Individuals with dementia and their partners were identified on the basis of data in the electronic health records (EHRs) of 451 Dutch general practices. EHRs were also the data source on their health problems, which were linked to the Dutch population registry and health administration data with demographic characteristics, date of institutionalization and date of death. Differences in the prevalence of sixteen groups of health problems and of specific health problems in partners during the year before and the year after the three transitions were examined using generalized estimating equation (GEE). RESULTS: 1110 partners of persons with dementia were identified. Problems related to the illness and/or loss of the person with dementia, were significantly more prevalent in the year after the dementia diagnosis (32% vs 17%) and in the year after the death of the person with dementia (59% vs 41%) than in the years before. Unspecified health problems were more prevalent in the year after the diagnosis than in the year before (30% vs 22%). After institutionalization, an increase was found in digestive problems and urological problems (30% vs 18% and 24% vs 17%). DISCUSSION: Transitions during the dementia care trajectory, namely the diagnosis, institutionalization and death of the person with dementia, significantly impact the cohabiting partner's health

How transitions in dementia care trajectories affect health problems in partners: A longitudinal analysis with linked health and administrative data

Objectives To evaluate whether the prevalence of health problems in cohabiting partners of people with dementia differs between the year before and the year after 3 transitions: the diagnosis of dementia, institutionalization, and the death of the person with dementia. Methods Individuals with dementia and their partners were identified on the basis of data in the electronic health records (EHRs) of 451 Dutch general practices. EHRs were also the data source on their health problems, which were linked to the Dutch population registry and health administration data with demographic characteristics, date of institutionalization, and date of death. Differences in the prevalence of 16 groups of health problems and of specific health problems in partners during the year before and the year after the 3 transitions were examined using a generalized estimating equation. Results About 1,110 partners of persons with dementia were identified. Problems related to the illness and/or loss of the person with dementia were significantly more prevalent in the year after the dementia diagnosis (32% vs. 17%) and in the year after the death of the person with dementia (59% vs. 41%) than in the years before. Unspecified health problems were more prevalent in the year after the diagnosis than in the year before (30% vs. 22%). After institutionalization, an increase was found in digestive problems and urological problems (30% vs. 18% and 24% vs. 17%). Discussion Transitions during the dementia care trajectory, namely, the diagnosis, institutionalization, and death of the person with dementia, significantly affect the cohabiting partner’s health

Duration of Care Trajectories in Persons With Dementia Differs According to Demographic and Clinical Characteristics

Objectives: To estimate (1) the duration of no formal care, home care, and institutional care after dementia diagnosis, and (2) the effect of age, sex, living situation, dementia medication, migration background, and income on this dementia care duration. Design: Longitudinal retrospective study using routinely recorded general practice electronic health records linked with population-based healthcare and mortality data. Setting and participants: In total, 11,012 community-dwelling persons who received an incident dementia diagnosis and were listed in a Dutch general practitioner database from 448 general practices in the Netherlands. Methods: Using multistate modeling analyses, we estimated the mean duration of care types (no/home/institutional care) for different ages based on simulations of transition rates and examined the influence of demographic and clinical factors on these durations. Results: From dementia diagnosis onward in 85-year-old men, the mean duration without formal care was 0.7 years, of home care 1.7, and institutional care 1.1 years. In 85-year-old women, the duration without formal care was 0.8 years, of home care 2.3, and institutional care 2.3 years. Total care duration was 3.5 years in 85-year-old men and 5.4 years in 85-year-old women. In men, the duration of home care was longer compared with no formal care and institutional care. The duration of no formal care was longer in persons not living alone, without prescribed dementia medication, with a non‒Western migration background, or with a higher income. The duration of home or institutional care was longer in women, persons without polypharmacy, in those living alone, or those with a Western background. Conclusions and implications: Our findings help to increase understanding of long-term dementia care trajectories and show that demographic and clinical factors determine the duration of care types. Our results can contribute to the organization of healthcare resource planning and monitoring of the effects of healthcare policy and interventions

Time from diagnosis to institutionalization and death in people with dementia

INTRODUCTION: Reliable estimates of time from diagnosis until institutionalization and death in people with dementia from routine nationally representative databases are lacking. METHODS: We selected 9230 people with dementia and 24,624 matched controls from family physicians' electronic records linked with national administrative databases to analyze time until institutionalization and death and associated factors. RESULTS: Median time from recorded diagnosis until institutionalization and until death for people with dementia was 3.9 and 5.0 years, respectively, which was considerably shorter than for controls. Once institutionalized, median time to death was longer for persons with dementia (2.5 years) than for controls (1.2 years). Older age and receiving home care were the strongest predictors of shorter time until institutionalization and death in people with dementia. Gender, cohabitation, migration status, frailty, polypharmacy, and dementia medication were other significant factors. DISCUSSION: The estimates could help to inform patients, their families, and policymakers about probable trajectories

Setting up a Governance Framework for Secondary Use of Routine Health Data in Nursing Homes: Development Study Using Qualitative Interviews

BACKGROUND: In the nursing home sector, reusing routinely recorded data from electronic health records (EHRs) for knowledge development and quality improvement is still in its infancy. Trust in appropriate and responsible reuse is crucial for patients and nursing homes deciding whether to share EHR data for these purposes. A data governance framework determines who may access the data, under what conditions, and for what purposes. This can help obtain that trust. Although increasing attention is being paid to data governance in the health care sector, little guidance is available on development and implementation of a data governance framework in practice. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the development process of a governance framework for the "Registry Learning from Data in Nursing Homes," a national registry for EHR data on care delivered by nursing home physicians (in Dutch: specialist ouderengeneeskunde) in Dutch nursing homes-to allow data reusage for research and quality improvement of care. METHODS: Relevant stakeholders representing practices, policies, and research in the nursing home sector were identified. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 people from 14 stakeholder organizations. The main aim of the interviews was to explore stakeholders' perspectives regarding the Registry's aim, data access criteria, and governing bodies' tasks and composition. Interview topics and analyses were guided by 8 principles regarding governance for reusing health data, as described in the literature. Interview results, together with legal advice and consensus discussions by the Registry's consortium partners, were used to shape the rules, regulations, and governing bodies of the governance framework. RESULTS: Stakeholders valued the involvement of nursing home residents and their representatives, nursing home physicians, nursing homes' boards of directors, and scientists and saw this as a prerequisite for a trustworthy data governance framework. For the Registry, involvement of these groups can be achieved through a procedure in which residents can provide their consent or objection to the reuse of the data, transparency about the decisions made, and providing them a position in a governing body. In addition, a data request approval procedure based on predefined assessment criteria indicates that data reuse by third parties aligns with the aims of the Registry, benefits the nursing home sector, and protects the privacy of data subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The stakeholders' views, expertise, and knowledge of other frameworks and relevant legislation serve to inform the application of governance principles to the contexts of both the nursing home sector and the Netherlands. Many different stakeholders were involved in the development of the Registry Learning from Data in Nursing Homes' governance framework and will continue to be involved. Engagement of the full range of stakeholders in an early stage of governance framework development is important to generate trust in appropriate and responsible data reuse

Psychotropic drug prescription rates in primary care for people with dementia from recorded diagnosis onwards

Background: Psychotropic drugs are frequently prescribed to people with dementia in nursing homes although severe adverse events and side effects are common. Less is known about the prevalence and types of psychotropic drug prescription in primary care for people with dementia. Objective: This study examined the prevalence of psychotropic drug prescriptions in primary care among persons with dementia from the year of diagnosis onwards. Methods: A longitudinal observational study using electronic health record (EHR) data was conducted. People with dementia were selected from EHR data of 451 general practices in the Netherlands. Age and gender-adjusted psychotropic drug prescription rates were calculated per 1000 person-years from the year the dementia diagnosis was first recorded in general practice up to 8 years after diagnosis. Results: Data of 15,687 patients were analyzed. The prescription rate of psychotropic drugs (not including antidementia drugs) was 420 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 409; 431) in the first year after the recorded dementia diagnosis, which increased to 801 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 649; 989) in the eighth year. The most frequently prescribed drugs were antidepressants, antipsychotics, and antidementia drugs, followed by anxiolytics, hypnotics, and antiepileptics. Conclusions: After a dementia diagnosis is recorded in general practice, the prevalence of psychotropic drug prescriptions is substantial and increases steadily during the disease trajectory of persons with dementia. Although the (in)appropriateness of prescribing was not assessed, these insights may stimulate primary care clinicians to (re)consider their prescription policy of psychotropics for people with dementia more carefully