Search

Background People living in care homes often have problems with pain, anxiety and depression. Whether being on analgesia, anxiolytics or antidepressants has any bearing on pain severity and quality of life (QoL) in this population, requires further investigation. Objectives (i) to examine the relationship between pain, anxiety and depression and medication use in care home residents and (ii) to compare those on medications to treat pain, anxiety and depression, and those who were not, and associations with pain severity and overall QoL. Methods This was a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial testing a falls prevention intervention in care homes. We recorded pain, anxiety and depression, QoL measurements and prescribed medication use. Results In 1589 participants, the mean age was 84.7 years (±9.3 SD), 32.2% were male and 67.3% had a diagnosis of dementia. 54.3% and 53.2% of participants had some level of pain and anxiety or depression respectively, regardless of prescribed medication use. There was a direct association between pain severity and being on any analgesia, opioid analgesia, and antidepressants, but no associations between pain severity and use of paracetamol and anxiolytics. QoL was best for residents with no pain and not on any analgesia, anxiolytics or antidepressants and worst for those with moderate-extreme pain and taking at least two of these classes of medications. Conclusion Many care home residents live with pain, anxiety and depression. Addressing residents' pain may also increase their quality of life, but using medication alone to reach this goal may be inadequate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pain is common in people with dementia, and pain can exacerbate the behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia. Effective pain management is challenging, not least in people with dementia. Impairments of cognition, communication and abstract thought can make communicating pain unreliable or impossible. It is unclear which biopsychosocial interventions for pain management are effective in people with dementia, and which interventions for behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia are effective in people with pain. The result is that drugs, physical therapies and psychological therapies might be either underused or overused. People with dementia and pain could be helped by assessment processes that characterise an individual's pain experience and dementia behaviours in a mechanistic manner, phenotyping. Chronic pain management has moved from a 'one size fits all' approach, towards personalised medicine, where interventions recommended for an individual depend upon the key mechanisms underlying their pain, and the relative values they place on benefits and adverse effects. Mechanistic phenotyping through careful personalised evaluation would define the mechanisms driving pain and dementia behaviours in an individual, enabling the formulation of a personalised intervention strategy. Central pain processing mechanisms are particularly likely to be important in people with pain and dementia, and interventions to accommodate and address these may be particularly helpful, not only to relieve pain but also the symptoms of dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction A timely diagnosis of dementia is crucial for initiating and maintaining support for people living with dementia. The coronavirus disease (COVID) pandemic temporarily halted Memory Clinics, where this is organised, and rate of dementia diagnosis has fallen. Despite increasing use of alternatives to face-to-face (F2F) consultations in other departments, it is unclear whether this is feasible within the traditional Memory Clinic model. Aims The main aim of this service improvement project performed during the pandemic was to explore feasibility of telephone (TC) and videoconference (VC) Memory Clinic consultations. Methods Consecutive patients on the Memory Clinic waiting list were telephoned and offered an initial appointment by VC or TC. Data extracted included: age, internet-enabled device ownership, reason for and choice of Memory Clinic assessment. We noted Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Blind (TC) and Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-III (VC via Attend Anywhere) scores, and feasibility of consultation. Results Out of 100 patients, 12 had a home assessment, moved away, been hospitalised, or died. 45, 21 and 6 preferred F2F, VC and TC assessments respectively. 16 were not contactable and offered a F2F appointment. The main reason for preferring F2F was non-ownership, or inability to use an internet-enabled device (80%). VC and TC preference reasons were unwillingness to come to hospital (59%), and convenience (41%). Attendance rate was 100% for VC and TC, but 77% for F2F. Feasibility (successful consultations) was seen in 90% (VC) and 67% (TC) patients. Conclusion For able and willing patients, remote Memory Consultations can be both feasible and beneficial. This has implications for future planning in dementia services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: C-reactive protein (CRP) is a non-specific acute phase reactant elevated in infection or inflammation. Higher levels indicate more severe infection and have been used as an indicator of COVID-19 disease severity. However, the evidence for CRP as a prognostic marker is yet to be determined. The aim of this study is to examine the CRP response in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and to determine the utility of CRP on admission for predicting inpatient mortality.Methods: Data were collected between 27 February and 10 June 2020, incorporating two cohorts: the COPE (COVID-19 in Older People) study of 1564 adult patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 admitted to 11 hospital sites (test cohort) and a later validation cohort of 271 patients. Admission CRP was investigated, and finite mixture models were fit to assess the likely underlying distribution. Further, different prognostic thresholds of CRP were analysed in a time-to-mortality Cox regression to determine a cut-off. Bootstrapping was used to compare model performance [Harrell's C statistic and Akaike information criterion (AIC)].Results: The test and validation cohort distribution of CRP was not affected by age, and mixture models indicated a bimodal distribution. A threshold cut-off of CRP ≥40 mg/L performed well to predict mortality (and performed similarly to treating CRP as a linear variable).Conclusions: The distributional characteristics of CRP indicated an optimal cut-off of ≥40 mg/L was associated with mortality. This threshold may assist clinicians in using CRP as an early trigger for enhanced observation, treatment decisions and advanced care planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) frequently presents in advanced stages. A significant proportion of those with reportedly good ECOG performance status (PS) fail to receive planned multidisciplinary team (MDT) treatment, often for functional reasons, but an objective decline in physical performance is not well described. Sarcopenia, or loss of muscle mass, is an integral part of cancer cachexia. However, changes in both muscle mass and physical performance may predate clinically overt cachexia, and may be present even with normal body mass index. Physical fitness for treatment is currently subjectively assessed by means of the PS score, which may be inadequate in predicting tolerance to treatment. This study aims to evaluate whether measuring physical performance and muscle mass at baseline in NSCLC patients, in addition to PS score, is able to predict commencement and successful completion of MDT-planned treatment. Methods/design: This is a prospective, single-centre exploratory study of NSCLC patients attending a Rapid Access Lung Cancer clinic. Baseline data collected are (methods in brackets): physical performance (Short Physical Performance Battery), muscle mass (bioelectrical impedance ± dual energy x-ray absorptiometry), patient and physician-assessed PS (ECOG and Karnofsky), nutritional status and presence of cachexia. Longitudinal data consists of receipt and completion of MDT treatment plan. The primary outcome measure is commencement of MDT-planned treatment, and important secondary outcomes include successful completion of treatment, length of stay in surgical patients, and risk of chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-related side effects. Discussion: A more comprehensive assessment of phenotype, particularly with regards to physical performance and muscle mass, will provide additional discriminatory information of patients' fitness for treatment. If positive, this study has the potential to identify targets for early intervention in those who are at risk of deterioration. This will subsequently enable optimisation of performance of patients with NSCLC, in anticipation of systemic treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Clinician‐rated performance status (C‐PS) is used routinely to predict whether patients are fit enough to undergo treatment for lung cancer. However, a good proportion of those with seemingly good C‐PS do not go on to receive, let alone complete treatment. The value of C‐PS in accurately predicting this is unclear, as is the merit of evaluating patient‐rated PS (P‐PS). Objectives: Our aim was to prospectively assess Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) and Karnofsky C‐PS and P‐PS in patients attending a rapid access lung cancer service (RALCS), the agreement between these scores, and whether any score could predict receipt and completion of multidisciplinary team (MDT)‐planned treatment. Results: ECOG and Karnofsky scores were highly correlated (Spearman's rho −0.79 for C‐PS and −0.828 for P‐PS, both p < 0.001). There was poor agreement between C‐PS and P‐PS scores (kappa statistics 0.275 for ECOG and 0.172 for Karnofsky); however, clinicians did not tend to consistently under‐ or overestimate patients' scores. ECOG P‐PS showed an association with completion of MDT‐planned treatment (p = 0.007), but C‐PS did not. Conclusion: Clinician‐rated PS was not associated with completion of MDT‐planned treatment, but there may be a role for patient‐rated PS. C‐PS and P‐PS were poorly correlated in a RALCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]