Search

Background: People with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) receive fewer guideline-concordant treatments for cardiovascular disease (CVD) than people with normal cognition (NC)., Objective: To understand physician perspectives on why patients with MCI receive fewer CVD treatments than patients with NC., Methods: As part of a mixed-methods study assessing how patient MCI influences physicians' decision making for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and stroke treatments, we conducted a qualitative study using interviews of physicians. Topics included participants' reactions to data that physicians recommend fewer CVD treatments to patients with MCI and reasons why participants think fewer CVD treatments may be recommended to this patient population., Results: Participants included 22 physicians (8 cardiologists, 7 neurologists, and 7 primary care physicians). Most found undertreatment of CVD in patients with MCI unreasonable, while some participants thought it could be considered reasonable. Participants postulated that other physicians might hold beliefs that could be reasons for undertreating CVD in patients with MCI. These beliefs fell into four main categories: 1) patients with MCI have worse prognoses than NC, 2) patients with MCI are at higher risk of treatment complications, 3) patients' cognitive impairment might hinder their ability to consent or adhere to treatment, and 4) patients with MCI benefit less from treatments than NC., Conclusion: These findings suggest that most physicians do not think it is reasonable to recommend less CVD treatment to patients with MCI than to patients with NC. Improving physician understanding of MCI might help diminish disparities in CVD treatment among patients with MCI.

Background: Older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) receive fewer guideline-concordant treatments for multiple health conditions than those with normal cognition. Reasons for this disparity are unclear., Objective: To better understand this disparity, we describe physician understanding and experience with patient MCI, particularly physician identification of MCI, ability to distinguish between MCI and dementia, and perspectives on education and training in MCI and dementia., Methods: As part of a mixed-methods study assessing the influence of patient MCI on physician recommendations for acute myocardial infraction and stroke treatments, we conducted a descriptive qualitative study using semi-structured interviews of physicians from three specialties. Key question topics included participants' identification of MCI, impressions of MCI and dementia awareness within their practice specialty, and perspectives on training and education in MCI., Results: The study included 22 physicians (8 cardiologists, 7 neurologists, and 7 internists). We identified two primary themes: There is 1) a lack of adequate understanding of the distinction between MCI and dementia; and 2) variation in physician approaches to identifying whether an older adult has MCI., Conclusion: These findings suggest that physicians have a poor understanding of MCI. Our results suggest that interventions that improve physician knowledge of MCI are needed.

Evidence suggests that older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) might not receive evidence-based treatments. We explored the impact of patient MCI on physician decision-making and recommendations for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in a pilot concurrent mixed-methods study of physicians recruited from one academic center. The mailed survey included a clinical vignette of AIS or AMI where the patient cognitive status was randomized (normal cognition, MCI, or early-stage dementia). The primary outcome was a composite summary measure of the proportion of guideline-concordant treatments recommended. Linear regression compared the primary outcome across patient cognition groups adjusting for physician characteristics. Semi-structured interviews done with 18 physicians (4 cardiologists, 9 neurologists, 5 internists) using a standard guide. Survey response rate was 72% (82/114) (49/61 neurologists; 33/53 cardiologists). As patient cognition worsened, neurologists recommended less guideline-concordant treatments after AIS (Ptrend<0.001 across patient cognition groups). Cardiologists did not after AMI (Ptrend = 0.11) in adjusted analyses. Neurologists' recommendation of guideline-concordant treatments after AIS was non-significantly lower in patients with MCI (composite measure, 0.13 points lower; P = 0.14) and significantly lower in patients with early-stage dementia (0.33 points lower; P<0.001) compared to cognitively normal patients. Interviews identified themes that may explain these findings including physicians assumed patients with MCI, compared with cognitively normal patients, have limited life expectancy, frailty and poor functioning, prefer less treatment, might adhere less to treatment, and have greater risks or burdens from treatment. These results suggest that patient MCI influences physician decision-making and recommendations for AIS and AMI treatments., Competing Interests: I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: I, Dr. Levine, report significant funding from the National Institutes of Health (research grants) and University of California, San Francisco (clinical event adjudicator for POINT and SOCRATES trials). I, Colleen Kollman, report being employed by a commercial company: Kollman Research Services, Ann Arbor, MI. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Background: Older patients (≥65 years) with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are undertreated for cardiovascular disease (CVD). One reason for this disparity could be that patients with MCI might underestimate the chances of CVD and overestimate dementia.Objective: To compare conceptions of health risk between older patients with MCI and normal cognition (NC) and their care partners.Methods: We conducted a multi-center mixed-methods study of patient-care partner dyads completing written quantitative surveys (73% response rate; 127 dyads: 66 MCI and 61 NC) or semi-structured interviews (20 dyads: 11 MCI, and 9 NC). Surveys assessed two-year patient risks of dementia, heart attack, stroke, and fall. Interviews assessed similar health risks and reasons for risk perceptions.Results: On surveys, a similarly low proportion of MCI and NC patients felt they were at risk of stroke (5% versus 2%; p = 0.62) and heart attack (2% versus 0%; p = 0.99). More MCI than NC patients perceived dementia risk (26% versus 2%; p < 0.001). Care partners' survey findings were similar. Interviews generally confirmed these patterns and also identified reasons for future health concerns. For both MCI and NC dyads, personal experience with cognitive decline or CVD (personal or family history) increased concerns about each disease. Additionally, perceptions of irreversibility and lack of treatment for cognitive decline increased concern about dementia.Conclusion: Less use of CVD treatments in MCI seems unlikely to be driven by differential perceptions of CVD risk. Future work to improve awareness of CVD risks in older patients and dementia risk in patients with MCI are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]