Gender differences in home care clients and admission to long-term care in Ontario, Canada: a population-based retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: Home care is integral to enabling older adults to delay or avoid long-term care (LTC) admission. To date, there is little population-based data about gender differences in home care users and their subsequent outcomes. Our objectives were to quantify differences between women and men who used home care in Ontario, Canada and to determine if there were subsequent differences in LTC admission. METHODS: This is a population-based retrospective cohort study. We identified all adults aged 76+ years living in Ontario and receiving home care on April 1, 2007 (baseline). Using the Resident Assessment Instrument – Home Care (RAI-HC) linked to other databases, we characterized the cohort by living condition, health and functioning, and identified all acute care and LTC use in the year following baseline. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 51,201 women and 20,102 men. Women were older, more likely to live alone, and more likely to rely on a child or child-in-law for caregiver support. Men most frequently identified a spouse as caregiver and their caregivers reported distress twice as often as women’s caregivers. Men had higher rates of most chronic conditions and were more likely to experience impairment. Men were more likely to be admitted to hospital, to have longer stays in hospital, and to be admitted to LTC. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding who uses home care and why is critical to ensuring that these programs effectively reduce LTC use. We found that women outnumbered men but that men presented with higher levels of need. This detailed gender analysis highlights how needs differ between older women, men, and their respective caregivers

Thermal requirements, growth and yield of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] genotypes under different agroclimatic zones of Punjab

A field experiment was carried out at four locations i.e. Ludhiana, Bathinda, Faridkot and Gurdaspur to study the influence of diverse environments on symbiotic traits, thermal requirements, growth in terms of plant height (cm) and yield (kg/ha) of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] genotypes under different agroclimatic zones of Punjab. Results indicated that crop sown on 15 May recorded the higher grain yield than later sowing dates of 1 June and 15 June at all the locations; 15 May sowing provided 23.3, 22.1 and 46.7% higher grain yield over 1 May, 1 June and 15 June sowing, respectively. Early sown crop acquired higher agro-climatic indices than delayed sowings. The crop sown on 15 May provided the maximum gross returns, net returns and B:C ratio as evident from the additional income of Rs 13599, 13040 and 22865 Rs/ha over 1 May, 1 June and 15 June sowing, respectively. Among the genotypes, AL 201 at Ludhiana and Gurdaspur, AL 1578 at Bathinda and PAU 881 at Faridkot resulted in the highest grain yield and maximum returns. The genotype AL 201 took more days to 50% flowering and maturity at all the locations. It can be concluded that 15 May is the optimum sowing date and AL 201 and PAU 881 are the promising genotypes for providing high productivity of pigeonpea under different agroclimatic zones of Punjab

Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias within a primary care setting.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia are becoming increasingly common with the aging of most populations. The majority of individuals with dementia will first present for care and assessment in primary care settings. There is a need for brief dementia screening instruments that can accurately diagnose dementia in primary care settings. The Mini-Cog is a brief, cognitive screening test that is frequently used to evaluate cognition in older adults in various settings. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog for diagnosing Alzheimer's disease dementia and related dementias in a primary care setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDLINE, Embase and four other databases, initially to September 2012. Since then, four updates to the search were performed using the same search methods, and the most recent was January 2017. We used citation tracking (using the databases' 'related articles' feature, where available) as an additional search method and contacted authors of eligible studies for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We only included studies that evaluated the Mini-Cog as an index test for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia or related forms of dementia when compared to a reference standard using validated criteria for dementia. We only included studies that were conducted in primary care populations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted and described information on the characteristics of the study participants and study setting. Using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) criteria we evaluated the quality of studies, and we assessed risk of bias and applicability of each study for each domain in QUADAS-2. Two review authors independently extracted information on the true positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives and entered the data into Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5). We then used RevMan 5 to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals. We summarized the sensitivity and specificity of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies in forest plots and also plotted them in a receiver operating characteristic plot. We also created a 'Risk of bias' and applicability concerns graph to summarize information related to the quality of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: There were a total of four studies that met our inclusion criteria, including a total of 1517 total participants. The sensitivity of the Mini-Cog varied between 0.76 to 1.00 in studies while the specificity varied between 0.27 to 0.85. The included studies displayed significant heterogeneity in both methodologies and clinical populations, which did not allow for a meta-analysis to be completed. Only one study (Holsinger 2012) was found to be at low risk of bias on all methodological domains. The results of this study reported that the sensitivity of the Mini-Cog was 0.76 and the specificity was 0.73. We found the quality of all other included studies to be low due to a high risk of bias with methodological limitations primarily in their selection of participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a limited number of studies evaluating the accuracy of the Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of dementia in primary care settings. Given the small number of studies, the wide range in estimates of the accuracy of the Mini-Cog, and methodological limitations identified in most of the studies, at the present time there is insufficient evidence to recommend that the Mini-Cog be used as a screening test for dementia in primary care. Further studies are required to determine the accuracy of Mini-Cog in primary care and whether this tool has sufficient diagnostic test accuracy to be useful as a screening test in this setting

Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias within a community setting.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease and related forms of dementia are becoming increasingly prevalent with the aging of many populations. The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease relies on tests to evaluate cognition and discriminate between individuals with dementia and those without dementia. The Mini-Cog is a brief, cognitive screening test that is frequently used to evaluate cognition in older adults in various settings. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this review was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog for detecting Alzheimer's disease dementia and related dementias in a community setting.Secondary objectives included investigations of the heterogeneity of test accuracy in the included studies and potential sources of heterogeneity. These potential sources of heterogeneity included the baseline prevalence of dementia in study samples, thresholds used to determine positive test results, the type of dementia (Alzheimer's disease dementia or all causes of dementia), and aspects of study design related to study quality. Overall, the goals of this review were to determine if the Mini-Cog is a cognitive screening test that could be recommended to screen for cognitive impairment in community settings. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), PsycINFO (Ovid SP), Science Citation Index (Web of Science), BIOSIS previews (Web of Science), LILACS (BIREME), and the Cochrane Dementia Group's developing register of diagnostic test accuracy studies to March 2013. We used citation tracking (using the database's 'related articles' feature, where available) as an additional search method and contacted authors of eligible studies for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all cross-sectional studies that utilized the Mini-Cog as an index test for the diagnosis of dementia when compared to a reference standard diagnosis of dementia using standardized dementia diagnostic criteria. For the current review we only included studies that were conducted on samples from community settings, and excluded studies that were conducted in primary care or secondary care settings. We considered studies to be conducted in a community setting where participants were sampled from the general population. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Information from studies meeting the inclusion criteria were extracted including information on the characteristics of participants in the studies. The quality of the studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 criteria and summarized using risk of bias applicability and summary graphs. We extracted information on the diagnostic test accuracy of studies including the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals of these measures and summarized the findings using forest plots. Study specific sensitivities and specificities were also plotted in receiver operating curve space. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 1620 participants. The sensitivities of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies were reported as 0.99, 0.76 and 0.99. The specificity of the Mini-Cog varied in the individual studies and was 0.93, 0.89 and 0.83. There was clinical and methodological heterogeneity between the studies which precluded a pooled meta-analysis of the results. Methodological limitations were present in all the studies introducing potential sources of bias, specifically with respect to the methods for participant selection. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are currently few studies assessing the diagnostic test accuracy of the Mini-Cog in community settings. The limited number of studies and the methodological limitations that are present in the current studies make it difficult to provide recommendations for or against the use of the Mini-Cog as a cognitive screening test in community settings. Additional well-designed studies comparing the Mini-Cog to other brief cognitive screening tests are required in order to determine the accuracy and utility of the Mini-Cog in community based settings

Depression rating scales for detection of major depression in people with dementia

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To identify the accuracy of depression rating scales as screening tools for detecting DpD and compare the diagnostic accuracy of different depression rating scales for detecting MDD among adults with Alzheimer's disease and related forms of dementia. To examine factors that may impact on the accuracy of depression rating scales that are used to diagnose depression. We will examine the reference standard used for verification of DpD, baseline prevalence of DpD in the study population, age of the underlying study population, gender of participants, type of dementia (any-cause dementia versus Alzheimer’s disease), study setting (community or primary care setting, long-term care, tertiary care setting), and study country as potential sources of heterogeneity. We will also evaluate the effects of using different cut-points of individual depression rating scales on the diagnostic accuracy of the scales

Utilizing population-based clinical and administrative data to explore the relevance of frailty to cholinesterase inhibitor use and discontinuation at nursing home transition.

Introduction Cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) are medications used to treat cognitive symptoms associated with Alzheimer’s disease. Previous studies examining the determinants of continued use or withdrawal of ChEIs during the transition into a nursing home have lacked detailed clinical information needed to understand the range of factors associated with pharmacotherapeutic decision-making. Objectives and Approach Population-based clinical and administrative health databases were linked to examine patterns of ChEI use among 47,851 adults (aged 66+) with dementia newly admitted to nursing homes in Ontario between April 2011-March 2015. We examined whether resident frailty, among other factors, was associated with ChEI discontinuation in the following year. Frailty was calculated using a validated 72-item index derived from the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI-MDS 2.0). Discontinuation was defined as a 30-day period when no dispensations occurred and no supply of ChEI was available. Subdistribution hazard models estimated the association between resident characteristics and discontinuation, accounting for competing risk of death. Results Over one-third (36.7%) of residents were receiving a ChEI at admission and this proportion was lower among those defined as frail (33.6%) vs. non-frail (40.7%) at admission. Among those on a ChEI at admission, 82.3% continued use and 17.7% discontinued during the following year. After accounting for resident characteristics, ChEI type and previous use, the incidence of discontinuation was 15% higher in frail residents vs. non-frail residents (hazard ratio (HR)= 1.15, 95\% confidence interval (CI) [1.01,1.30]). Residents with severe aggressive behaviours (HR=1.82, 95% CI [1.60, 2.07]), and higher levels of cognitive impairment (HR=1.29, 95% CI [1.10, 1.51]) were more likely to discontinue. Residents aged 85+ (HR=0.69, 95% CI [0.61, 0.77]) and those who were widowed (HR=0.84, 95% CI [0.77, 0.91]) were less likely to discontinue. Conclusion/Implications Most residents who entered on a ChEI continued treatment during follow-up. The availability of linked clinical and administrative data allowed for a novel exploration of predictors of ChEI discontinuation. Frailty, severity of cognitive impairment and aggressive behaviours were associated with ChEI discontinuation; whereas selected sociodemographic factors predicted continued use

Cholinesterase Inhibitors and Hospitalization for Bradycardia: A Population-Based Study

Laura Park-Wyllie and colleagues examined the health records of more than 1.4 million older adults and show that initiation of cholinesterase inhibitor therapy is associated with a more than doubling of the risk of hospitalization for bradycardia

Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease dementia and other dementias within a secondary care setting

Background: The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias relies on clinical assessment. There is a high prevalence of cognitive disorders, including undiagnosed dementia in secondary care settings. Short cognitive tests can be helpful in identifying those who require further specialist diagnostic assessment; however, there is a lack of consensus around the optimal tools to use in clinical practice. The Mini‐Cog is a short cognitive test comprising three‐item recall and a clock‐drawing test that is used in secondary care settings. Objectives: The primary objective was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini‐Cog for detecting Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias in a secondary care setting. The secondary objectives were to investigate the heterogeneity of test accuracy in the included studies and potential sources of heterogeneity. These potential sources of heterogeneity will include the baseline prevalence of dementia in study samples, thresholds used to determine positive test results, the type of dementia (Alzheimer's disease dementia or all causes of dementia), and aspects of study design related to study quality. Search methods: We searched the following sources in September 2012, with an update to 12 March 2019: Cochrane Dementia Group Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), BIOSIS Previews (Web of Knowledge), Science Citation Index (ISI Web of Knowledge), PsycINFO (OvidSP), and LILACS (BIREME). We made no exclusions with regard to language of Mini‐Cog administration or language of publication, using translation services where necessary. Selection criteria: We included cross‐sectional studies and excluded case‐control designs, due to the risk of bias. We selected those studies that included the Mini‐Cog as an index test to diagnose dementia where dementia diagnosis was confirmed with reference standard clinical assessment using standardised dementia diagnostic criteria. We only included studies in secondary care settings (including inpatient and outpatient hospital participants). Data collection and analysis: We screened all titles and abstracts generated by the electronic database searches. Two review authors independently checked full papers for eligibility and extracted data. We determined quality assessment (risk of bias and applicability) using the QUADAS‐2 tool. We extracted data into two‐by‐two tables to allow calculation of accuracy metrics for individual studies, reporting the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals of these measures, summarising them graphically using forest plots. Main results: Three studies with a total of 2560 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria, set in neuropsychology outpatient referrals, outpatients attending a general medicine clinic, and referrals to a memory clinic. Only n = 1415 (55.3%) of participants were included in the analysis to inform evaluation of Mini‐Cog test accuracy, due to the selective use of available data by study authors. There were concerns related to high risk of bias with respect to patient selection, and unclear risk of bias and high concerns related to index test conduct and applicability. In all studies, the Mini‐Cog was retrospectively derived from historic data sets. No studies included acute general hospital inpatients. The prevalence of dementia ranged from 32.2% to 87.3%. The sensitivities of the Mini‐Cog in the individual studies were reported as 0.67 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 0.71), 0.60 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.72), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.90). The specificity of the Mini‐Cog for each individual study was 0.87 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.92), 0.65 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.73), and 1.00 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.00). We did not perform meta‐analysis due to concerns related to risk of bias and heterogeneity. Authors' conclusions: This review identified only a limited number of diagnostic test accuracy studies using Mini‐Cog in secondary care settings. Those identified were at high risk of bias related to patient selection and high concerns related to index test conduct and applicability. The evidence was indirect, as all studies evaluated Mini‐Cog differently from the review question, where it was anticipated that studies would conduct Mini‐Cog and independently but contemporaneously perform a reference standard assessment to diagnose dementia. The pattern of test accuracy varied across the three studies. Future research should evaluate Mini‐Cog as a test in itself, rather than derived from other neuropsychological assessments. There is also a need for evaluation of the feasibility of the Mini‐Cog for the diagnosis of dementia to help adequately determine its role in the clinical pathway