Search

Background The PRomoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia (PrAISED) study delivered an exercise and functional activity programme to participants living with dementia. A Randomised Controlled Trial showed no measurable benefits in activities of daily living, physical activity or quality of life. Objective To explore participants' responses to PrAISED and explain why an intervention that might be expected to have produced measurable health gains did not do so. Methods A process evaluation using qualitative methods, comprising interviews and researcher notes. Setting Data were collected in participants' homes or remotely by telephone or videoconferencing. Sample A total of 88 interviews were conducted with 44 participants living with dementia (n  = 32 intervention group; n  = 12 control group) and 39 caregivers. A total of 69 interviews were conducted with 26 therapists. Results Participants valued the intervention as proactively addressing health issues that were of concern to them, and as a source of social contact, interaction, information and advice. Facilitators to achieving positive outcomes included perceiving progress towards desired goals, positive expectations, therapists' skills and rapport with participants, and caregiver support. Barriers included: cognitive impairment, which prevented independent engagement and carry-over between sessions; chronic physical health problems and intercurrent acute illness and injury; 'tapering' (progressively infrequent supervision intended to help develop habits and independent activity); and the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions Self-directed interventions may not be appropriate in the context of dementia, even in the mild stages of the condition. Dementia-specific factors affected outcomes including caregiver support, rapport with therapists, availability of supervision, motivational factors and the limitations of remote delivery. The effects of cognitive impairment, multimorbidity and frailty overwhelmed any positive impact of the intervention. Maintenance of functional ability is valued, but in the face of inevitable progression of disease, other less tangible outcomes become important, challenging how we frame 'health gain' and trial outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background apathy, defined as reduced goal-directed activity, interests and emotion, is highly prevalent in neurocognitive disorders (NCDs). Apathy has important consequences for the individuals who experience it and their carers, yet the lived experiences of apathy in this population are not well understood. Objective to explore how people with NCDs and their carers understand and experience apathy. Method in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted in participants' homes. Sixteen people with NCDs (dementia or mild cognitive impairment) and 14 carers, living in four geographical areas of England, took part. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results four themes were generated: 'Apathy is Poorly Understood'; 'Too much trouble: Mediating Effort and Outcome'; 'Preserving Identity in the Face of Loss of Capability and Autonomy' and 'Opportunity and Exclusion'. Conclusion apathy is experienced as an understandable response to the everyday struggle people with NCDs face to preserve identity in the face of threats to capability and autonomy and is exacerbated by the lack of support and opportunities. Social and environmental modifications may help reduce apathy. In line with previous qualitative research, this challenges the dominant view of apathy as a neuropsychiatric symptom that excludes the social–environmental context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The optimal management of hypertension in people with dementia is uncertain. This review explores if people with dementia experience greater adverse effects from antihypertensive medications, if cognitive function is protected or worsened by controlling blood pressure (BP) and if there are subgroups of people with dementia for whom antihypertensive therapy is more likely to be harmful. Robust evidence is scant, trials of antihypertensive medications have generally excluded those with dementia. Observational data show changes in risk association over the life course, with high BP being a risk factor for cognitive decline in mid-life, while low BP is predictive in later life. It is therefore possible that excessive BP lowering in older people with dementia might harm cognition. From the existing literature, there is no direct evidence of benefit or harm from treating hypertension in people with dementia. So what practical steps can the clinician take? Assess capacity, establish patient preferences when making treatment decisions, use ambulatory monitoring to thoroughly assess BP, individualise and consider deprescribing where side effects (e.g. hypotension) outweigh the benefits. Future research might include pragmatic randomised trials of targeted deprescribing, which include patient-centred outcome measures to help support decision-making and studies to address mechanistic uncertainties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) may be helpful for the management of hypertension, but little is known about its tolerability in people with dementia. Objective: to review the published evidence to determine the tolerability of ABPM in people with dementia. Methods: English language search conducted in MEDLINE and EMBASE, using Ambulatory blood pressure' AND 'Dementia' (and associated synonyms) from 1996 to March 2015. Inclusion criteria: people diagnosed with dementia AND in whom blood pressure was measured using ABPM. The initial search was undertaken using title and abstract reviews, with selected papers being agreed for inclusion by two reviewers. Potentially eligible papers were assessed, and high-quality papers were retained. Two reviewers agreed the abstracted data for analysis. Meta-analysis was used to combine results across studies. Results: of the 221 screened abstracts, 13 studies (6%) met inclusion criteria, 5 had sufficient data and were of sufficient quality, involving 461 participants, most of whom had mild--moderate dementia. 77.7% (95% CI 62.2-93.2%) were able to tolerate ABPM; agreement with office BP was moderate to weak (two studies only--coefficients 0.3-0.38 for systolic blood pressure and 0.11-0.32 for diastolic blood pressure). One study compared home BP monitoring by a relative or ambulatory BP monitoring with office BP measures and found high agreement (ϗ 0.81). The little available evidence suggested increased levels of dementia being associated with reduced tolerability. Conclusions: ABPM is well tolerated in people with mild-moderate dementia and provides some additional information over and above office BP alone. However, few studies have addressed ABPM in people with more severe dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the Milan Geriatrics 75+ Cohort study indicating that for people who are 75 years or older with impaired functional and cognitive statuses, the relationship between blood pressure and 10-year mortality maybe U shaped with blood pressure of 165/85 mmHg being associated with the lowest mortality risk. It suggests that hypertension guidelines should advise to consider frailty when making treatment decisions and the need to acknowledge all benefits and harms of the treatment.