Search

Introduction: Reliable data on the incidence rates for young‐onset dementia (YOD) are lacking, but are necessary for research on disease etiology and to raise awareness among health care professionals. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis on population‐based studies on the incidence of YOD, published between January 1, 1990 and February 1, 2022, according to Meta‐analyses of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Data were analyzed using random‐effects meta‐analyses. Results were age‐standardized, and heterogeneity was assessed by subgroup analyses and meta‐regression. Results: Sixty‐one articles were included. Global age‐standardized incidence rates increased from 0.17/100,000 in age 30 to 34 years, to 5.14/100,000 in age 60 to 64 years, giving a global total age‐standardized incidence rate of 11 per 100,000 in age 30 to 64. This corresponds to 370,000 new YOD cases annually worldwide. Heterogeneity was high and meta‐regression showed geographic location significantly influenced this heterogeneity. Discussion: This meta‐analysis shows the current best estimate of YOD incidence. New prospective cohort studies are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Timely diagnosis and adequate care is important for persons with young-onset dementia (YOD) and their caregivers, due to the high impact of the disease. Initiating care can be difficult for the general practitioner (GP) and other healthcare professionals. Objective: Provide insight in the care use of persons with YOD and identify factors influencing care use. Methods: A primary care register was used for this study. Information on the care use of persons with YOD was extracted from the GPs written notes. Information entailed time until start of care use, reasons and factors influencing the GP's decision, and reasons and factors influencing actual care use were included. Analyses included quantitative explorative descriptive analyses, and qualitative manifest content analyses. Results: 75 persons with YOD were included in this study. The main reason for GPs to refer for diagnosis was concerns of caregivers. After diagnosis, 72% of the persons were assigned a case manager, 42.7% received day care, and 44% were admitted to a long-term care facility. A higher percentage of persons without a case manager was admitted to a long-term care facility (64%) compared to the persons with a case manager (36%). Reasons for not initiating care were reluctancy of the persons with YOD or their caregivers, the person deceased, or because the GP did not refer for care. Conclusion: Care use differed between persons due to different needs and reasons. Although most persons with YOD receive care in the years after diagnosis, there are still factors that could be improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Young-onset dementia (YOD) has many underlying etiologies, leading to a large heterogeneity in first symptoms. This makes it difficult for general practitioners (GPs) to recognize YOD.Objective: Identify early symptoms that are more common in the pre-diagnostic phase of YOD.Methods: We performed a case-control study nested in a primary-care registry on 89 cases and 162 matched controls, where we compared symptoms of people with YOD up to 5 years before diagnosis to their matched control group without YOD. The variables included in this study were International Classification of Primary Care codes and symptoms extracted from written GP notes and categorized in groups. We used Generalized Equation Estimation to analyze symptom's time-trajectories and logistic regression and ROC-curves to analyze differences in number of symptom categories reported.Results: Cognitive symptoms were more common in people with YOD 5 years before diagnosis, affective symptoms 4 years before diagnosis, social symptoms 3 years, behavioral symptoms 2 years, and daily functioning disturbances 1 year before diagnosis. The ROC-curve suggested that reporting two or more symptom categories at the GP gave the best trade-off between sensitivity (85%) and specificity (77%), for the highest percentage of correctly diagnosed persons.Conclusion: This study showed people with YOD present differently than people without YOD. However, it may still be difficult for GPs to use these symptom categories to distinguish people with YOD, since the symptoms also occur in people with other diseases. A combination of reported symptom categories increases the probability of an underlying cause of YOD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Several European studies investigated the trends in psychotropic drug prescriptions (PDPs) among nursing home (NH) residents and reported a decline in antipsychotics prescriptions. Since the Dutch long-term care system differs from other European systems (e.g. higher threshold for NH admission and trained elderly care physicians), this study explores the trends in PDPs in Dutch NH residents with dementia.Methods: The study used data from nine studies, comprising two cross-sectional studies, one cohort study, and six cluster-randomized controlled trials, collected in Dutch NHs between 2003 and 2018. With multilevel logistic regression analysis, NHs as a random effect, we estimated the trends in PDPs overall and for five specific psychotropic drug groups (antipsychotics, antidepressants, anxiolytics, hypnotics, and anti-dementia drugs), adjusting for confounders: age, gender, severity of dementia, severity of neuropsychiatric symptoms, and length of stay in NHs.Results: The absolute prescription rate of antipsychotics was 37.5% in 2003 and decreased (OR = 0.947, 95% CI [0.926, 0.970]) every year. The absolute prescription rate of anti-dementia drugs was 0.8% in 2003 and increased (OR = 1.162, 95% CI [1.105, 1.223]) per year. The absolute rate of overall PDPs declined from 62.7% in 2003 to 40.4% in 2018.Conclusions: Among Dutch NH residents with dementia, the odds of antipsychotics prescriptions decreased by 5.3% per year while the odds of anti-dementia drug prescriptions increased by 16.2%. There were no distinct trends in antidepressants, anxiolytics, and hypnotics prescriptions. However, overall PDPs were still high. The PDPs in NH residents remain an issue of concern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: On May 11, the Dutch Government allowed 26 nursing homes to welcome 1 visitor per resident, after 2 months of lockdown. The study aimed to monitor in-depth the feasibility of the regulations and their impact on the well-being of residents, their visitors, and healthcare staff.Design: Mixed-methods study in 5 of the 26 facilities; the facilities were affiliated to an academic network of nursing homes.Participants: Visitors and healthcare professionals.Intervention: Allowing visitors using local regulations based on national guidelines.Measurements: Digital questionnaire, analyzing documentation such as infection prevention control protocols, attending meetings of COVID-19 crisis teams, in-depth telephone or in-person interviews with visitors and healthcare professionals, and on-site observations.Results: National guidelines were translated with great variety into local care practice. Healthcare professionals agreed that reopening would increase the well-being of the residents and their loved ones. However, there were also great worries for increasing workload, increasing the risk of emotional exhaustion, and the risk of COVID-19 infections. Compliance with local regulations was generally satisfactory, but maintaining social distance and correctly wearing face masks appeared to be difficult. Care staff remained ambivalent for fear of infections. In general, allowing visitors was experienced as having a positive impact on the well-being of all stakeholders. Nevertheless, some residents with dementia showed negative effects.Conclusion: The complete lockdown of Dutch nursing homes had a substantial impact on the well-being of the residents. The reopening was welcomed by all stakeholders, but provided a high organizational workload as well as feelings of ambivalence among care staff. In the second wave, a more tailored approach is being implemented. However, facilities are sometimes still struggling to find the right balance between infection control and well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Dementia at a young age differs from late onset dementia in pathology and care needs. This requires further research to improve the understanding of this group, support and service provision. Aim of current study is to reach consensus on the terminology and operational definition (i.e., age-related criteria and possible causes) of dementia at a young age, to aid further research.Methods: A classical Delphi technique was used to transform opinions into group consensus by using an online survey. In three rounds statements regarding (1) terminology, (2) age-related criteria, and (3) aetiologies that can be considered as causes of dementia at a young age were sent to international experts in the field to give their opinions and additional comments on the statements.Results: Forty-four experts responded and full consensus was reached on 22 out of 35 statements. Young-onset dementia emerged as the term of preference. Provisional consensus was found for the use of age 65 at symptom onset as preferred cut-off age. Consensus was reached on the inclusion of 15 out of 22 aetiologies and categories of aetiologies as potential cause for dementia at a young age.Conclusions: A clear term and operational definition have been reached. Although beneficial for conducting future research to gain more insight in pathology and care needs of young people living with dementia, still consensus about some details is lacking. To reach consensus about these details and implications for use in research and clinical practice, the organisation of an in person consensus meeting is advised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT The prevalence of neuropsychiatric symptoms and the influence of predictive factors in cognitively impaired nursing home patients were reviewed. Articles were identified by means of a MEDLINE and PsychInfo [...]