10 research outputs found

    Clinicians' views on conversations and shared decision making in diagnostic testing for Alzheimer's disease: The ABIDE project

    No full text
    This study explores clinicians' views on and experiences with when, how, and by whom decisions about diagnostic testing for Alzheimer's disease are made and how test results are discussed with patients. Following a preparatory focus group with 13 neurologists and geriatricians, we disseminated an online questionnaire among 200 memory clinic clinicians. Respondents were 95 neurologists and geriatricians (response rate 47.5%). Clinicians (74%) indicated that decisions about testing are made before the first encounter, yet they favored a shared decision-making approach. Patient involvement seems limited to receiving information. Clinicians with less tolerance for uncertainty preferred a bigger say in decisions (P < .05). Clinicians indicated to always communicate the diagnosis (94%), results of different tests (88%-96%), and risk of developing dementia (66%). Clinicians favor patient involvement in deciding about diagnostic testing, but conversations about decisions and test results can be improved and supporte

    Development and usability of ADappt: Web-based tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and alzheimer disease: Web-Based Tool to Support Clinicians, Patients, and Caregivers in the Diagnosis of Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer Disease

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: As a result of advances in diagnostic testing in the field of Alzheimer disease (AD), patients are diagnosed in earlier stages of the disease, for example, in the stage of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). This poses novel challenges for a clinician during the diagnostic workup with regard to diagnostic testing itself, namely, which tests are to be performed, but also on how to engage patients in this decision and how to communicate test results. As a result, tools to support decision making and improve risk communication could be valuable for clinicians and patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to present the design, development, and testing of a Web-based tool for clinicians in a memory clinic setting and to ascertain whether this tool can (1) facilitate the interpretation of biomarker results in individual patients with MCI regarding their risk of progression to dementia, (2) support clinicians in communicating biomarker test results and risks to MCI patients and their caregivers, and (3) support clinicians in a process of shared decision making regarding the diagnostic workup of AD. METHODS: A multiphase mixed-methods approach was used. Phase 1 consisted of a qualitative needs assessment among professionals, patients, and caregivers; phase 2, consisted of an iterative process of development and the design of the tool (ADappt); and phase 3 consisted of a quantitative and qualitative assessment of usability and acceptability of ADappt. Across these phases, co-creation was realized via a user-centered qualitative approach with clinicians, patients, and caregivers. RESULTS: In phase 1, clinicians indicated the need for risk calculation tools and visual aids to communicate test results to patients. Patients and caregivers expressed their needs for more specific information on their risk for developing AD and related consequences. In phase 2, we developed the content and graphical design of ADappt encompassing 3 modules: a risk calculation tool, a risk communication tool including a summary sheet for patients and caregivers, and a conversation starter to support shared decision making regarding the diagnostic workup. In phase 3, ADappt was considered to be clear and user-friendly. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians in a memory clinic setting can use ADappt, a Web-based tool, developed using multiphase design and co-creation, for support that includes an individually tailored interpretation of biomarker test results, communication of test results and risks to patients and their caregivers, and shared decision making on diagnostic testing

    Motivations of patients and their care partners for visiting a memory clinic. A qualitative study

    No full text
    Objective: We investigated motivations of patients and care partners for their memory clinic visit, and whether these are expressed in consultations. Methods: We included data from 115 patients (age 71 ± 11, 49% Female) and their care partners (N = 93), who completed questionnaires after their first consultation with a clinician. Audio-recordings of these consultations were available from 105 patients. Motivations for visiting the clinic were content-coded as reported by patients in the questionnaire, and expressed by patients and care partners in consultations. Results: Most patients reported seeking a cause for symptoms (61%) or to confirm/exclude a (dementia) diagnosis (16%), yet 19% reported another motivation: (more) information, care access, or treatment/advice. In the first consultation, about half of patients (52%) and care partners (62%) did not express their motivation(s). When both expressed a motivation, these differed in about half of dyads. A quarter of patients (23%) expressed a different/complementary motivation in the consultation, then reported in the questionnaire. Conclusion: Motivations for visiting a memory clinic can be specific and multifaceted, yet are often not addressed during consultations. Practice implications: We should encourage clinicians, patients, and care partners to talk about motivations for visiting the memory clinic, as a starting point to personalize (diagnostic) care

    Cerebrospinal fluid levels of Alzheimer's disease biomarkers in middle-aged patients with type 1 diabetes

    No full text
    Type 1 diabetes is associated with moderate cognitive decline and cerebral alterations and may lead to an increased risk of dementia, including Alzheimer's disease. This study aimed to investigate the levels of risk markers for Alzheimer's disease in middle-aged patients with type 1 diabetes and controls, and their potential associations with cognitive and cerebral measures. Levels of β-amyloid (Aβ) 42, Tau, phosphorylated Tau (pTau), the soluble form of low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein 1 (sLRP1) and macrophage colony-stimulating factor (MCSF) were quantified by ELISA in serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) collected from 37 patients with type 1 diabetes and 15 controls. Associations between biomarkers and determinants of cognitive function and white matter integrity were assessed using hierarchical regression analysis controlling for age, HbA1c and estimated intelligence quotient (IQ). CSF levels of pTau, Aβ42 and LRP1 were higher in patients with type 1 diabetes than in controls (all p <0.05). There was a trend towards increased Tau levels in patients with type 1 diabetes (p = 0.056), while CSF levels of MCSF were similar between patients with type 1 diabetes and controls. Regression analysis showed that elevated CSF sLRP1 levels were associated with better attention (β = 0.518; p = 0.002) and a better speed of information-processing (β = 0.368; p = 0.034), as well as increased integrity of the white matter of the right inferior fronto-occipital tract (β = 0.395; p = 0.022). Furthermore, elevated Tau levels were associated with decreased integrity of the white matter of right inferior fronto-occipital tract (β = -0.584; p = 0.002). CSF levels of biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease are altered in patients with type 1 diabetes compared with controls, but the observed profile does not match the profile characterising pre-Alzheimer's disease patient

    Diagnostic performance of Elecsys immunoassays for cerebrospinal fluid Alzheimer's disease biomarkers in a nonacademic, multicenter memory clinic cohort: The ABIDE project

    No full text
    Introduction: We compared the automated Elecsys and manual Innotest immunoassays for cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Alzheimer's disease biomarkers in a multicenter diagnostic setting. Methods: We collected CSF samples from 137 participants in eight local memory clinics. Amyloid β(1–42) (Aβ42), total tau (t-tau), and phosphorylated tau (p-tau) were centrally analyzed with Innotest and Elecsys assays. Concordances between methods were assessed. Results: Biomarker results strongly correlated between assays with Spearman's ρ 0.94 for Aβ42, 0.98 for t-tau, and 0.98 for p-tau. Using Gaussian mixture modeling, cohort-specific cut-points were estimated at 1092 pg/mL for Aβ42, 235 pg/mL for t-tau, and 24 pg/mL for p-tau. We found an excellent concordance of biomarker abnormality between assays of 97% for Aβ42 and 96% for both t-tau and p-tau. Discussion: The high concordances between Elecsys and Innotest in this nonacademic, multicenter cohort support the use of Elecsys for CSF Alzheimer's disease diagnostics and allow conversion of results between methods

    Alzheimer's biomarkers in daily practice (ABIDE) project: Rationale and design

    No full text
    The Alzheimer's biomarkers in daily practice (ABIDE) project is designed to translate knowledge on diagnostic tests (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], cerebrospinal fluid [CSF], and amyloid positron emission tomography [PET]) to daily clinical practice with a focus on mild cognitive impairment (MCI). ABIDE is a 3-year project with a multifaceted design and is structured into interconnected substudies using both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Based on retrospective data, we develop personalized risk estimates for MCI patients. Prospectively, we collect MRI and CSF data from 200 patients from local memory clinics and amyloid PET from 500 patients in a tertiary setting, to optimize application of these tests in daily practice. Furthermore, ABIDE will develop strategies for optimal patient-clinician conversations. Ultimately, this will result in a set of practical tools for clinicians to support the choice of diagnostic tests and facilitate the interpretation and communication of their result

    Alzheimer's biomarkers in daily practice (ABIDE) project: Rationale and design

    No full text
    Introduction The Alzheimer's biomarkers in daily practice (ABIDE) project is designed to translate knowledge on diagnostic tests (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], cerebrospinal fluid [CSF], and amyloid positron emission tomography [PET]) to daily clinical practice with a focus on mild cognitive impairment (MCI) Methods ABIDE is a 3-year project with a multifaceted design and is structured into interconnected substudies using both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Results Based on retrospective data, we develop personalized risk estimates for MCI patients. Prospectively, we collect MRI and CSF data from 200 patients from local memory clinics and amyloid PET from 500 patients in a tertiary setting, to optimize application of these tests in daily practice. Furthermore, ABIDE will develop strategies for optimal patient-clinician conversations. Discussion Ultimately, this will result in a set of practical tools for clinicians to support the choice of diagnostic tests and facilitate the interpretation and communication of their results

    Clinical applicability of quantitative atrophy measures on MRI in patients suspected of Alzheimer's disease

    Get PDF
    Objectives: Neurodegeneration in suspected Alzheimer’s disease can be determined using visual rating or quantitative volumetric assessments. We examined the feasibility of volumetric measurements of gray matter (GMV) and hippocampal volume (HCV) and compared their diagnostic performance with visual rating scales in academic and non-academic memory clinics. Materials and methods: We included 231 patients attending local memory clinics (LMC) in the Netherlands and 501 of the academic Amsterdam Dementia Cohort (ADC). MRI scans were acquired using local protocols, including a T1-weighted sequence. Quantification of GMV and HCV was performed using FSL and FreeSurfer. Medial temporal atrophy and global atrophy were assessed with visual rating scales. ROC curves were derived to determine which measure discriminated best between cognitively normal (CN), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and Alzheimer’s dementia (AD). Results: Patients attending LMC (age 70.9 ± 8.9 years; 47% females; 19% CN; 34% MCI; 47% AD) were older, had more cerebrovascular pathology, and had lower GMV and HCV compared to those of the ADC (age 64.9 ± 8.2 years; 42% females; 35% CN, 43% MCI, 22% AD). While visual ratings were feasible in > 95% of scans in both cohorts, quantification was achieved in 94–98% of ADC, but only 68–85% of LMC scans, depending on the software. Visual ratings and volumetric outcomes performed similarly in discriminating CN vs AD in both cohorts. Conclusion: In clinical settings, quantification of GM and hippocampal atrophy currently fails in up to one-third of scans, probably due to lack of standardized acquisition protocols. Diagnostic accuracy is similar for volumetric measures and visual rating scales, making the latter suited for clinical practice. Summary statement: In a real-life clinical setting, volumetric assessment of MRI scans in dementia patients may require acquisition protocol optimization and does not outperform visual rating scales. Key Points: • In a real-life clinical setting, the diagnostic performance of visual rating scales is similar to that of automatic volumetric quantification and may be sufficient to distinguish Alzheimer’s disease groups. • Volumetric assessment of gray matter and hippocampal volumes from MRI scans of patients attending non-academic memory clinics fails in up to 32% of cases. • Clinical MR acquisition protocols should be optimized to improve the output of quantitative software for segmentation of Alzheimer’s disease–specific outcomes
    corecore