Search

Introduction: Pharmacological management is a vital aspect of dementia care. Suboptimal medication prescribing and adverse drug reactions are major causes for ongoing concerns for the quality of care. This review aims to investigate the existence and comprehensiveness of Australian guidelines dedicated to supporting dementia care in the context of pharmacological management., Methods: Guideline registries and databases (EMBASE and CINAHL) were searched to identify Australian guidelines addressing pharmacological management in dementia care and to uncover barriers and considerations associated with guideline implementation., Results: Seven Australian guidelines were identified. Barriers to effective implementation were identified at individual, provider, and system levels. None of the identified guidelines provided comprehensive guidance on management of multimorbidity and polypharmacy., Discussion: Although Australian guidelines are available to guide pharmacological management in dementia, several barriers impede their effective implementation. There is an urgent need for updated guidelines that address the management of multimorbidity and polypharmacy in people living with dementia., Competing Interests: SN was employed by Possability Group Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Nagar, Ma, Pan, Huynh, Tan and Jin.)

Background: Observational Alzheimer's disease (AD) cohorts including the Australian, Biomarkers, Imaging and Lifestyle (AIBL) Study have enhanced our understanding of AD. The generalizability of findings from AIBL to the general population has yet to be studied., Objective: We aimed to compare characteristics of people with AD dementia in AIBL to 1) the general population of older Australians using pharmacological treatment for AD dementia, and to 2) the general population of older Australians who self-reported a diagnosis of dementia., Methods: Descriptive study comparing people aged 65 years of over (1) in AIBL that had a diagnosis of AD dementia, (2) dispensed with pharmacological treatment for AD in Australia in 2021 linked to the Australian census in 2021 (refer to as PBS/census), (3) self-reported a diagnosis of dementia in the 2021 Australian census (refer to as dementia/census). Baseline characteristics included age, sex, highest education attainment, primary language, and medical co-morbidities., Results: Participants in AIBL were younger, had more years of education, and had a lower culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) population compared to the PBS/census cohort and dementia/census cohort (mean age±standard deviation - AIBL 79±7 years, PBS/census 81±7, p < 0.001, dementia/census 83±8, p < 0.001; greater than 12 years of education AIBL 40%, PBS/census 35%, p = 0.020, dementia/census 29%, p < 0.001; CALD - AIBL 3%, PBS/census 20%, p < 0.001, dementia/census 22%, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that care should be taken regarding the generalizability of AIBL in CALD populations and the interpretation of results on the natural history of AD.

Background: Residential InReach presents an alternative to hospital admission for aged care residents swabbed for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), although relative outcomes remain unknown., Aims: To compare rates and predictors of 28-day mortality for aged care residents seen by InReach with COVID-19, or 'suspected COVID-19' (sCOVID), including hospital versus InReach-based care., Methods: Prospective observational study of consecutive patients referred to a Victorian InReach service meeting COVID-19 testing criteria between April and October 2020 (prevaccine availability). COVID-19 was determined by positive polymerase chain reaction testing on nasopharyngeal swab. sCOVID-19 was defined as meeting symptomatic Victorian Government testing criteria but persistently swab negative., Results: There were no significant differences in age, sex, Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) or Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) between 152 patients with COVID-19 and 118 patients with sCOVID. Similar results were found for 28-day mortality between patients with COVID-19 (35/152, 23%) and sCOVID (32/118, 27%) (P = 0.4). For the combined cohort, 28-day mortality was associated with initial oxygen saturation (P < 0.001), delirium (P < 0.001), hospital transfer for acuity (P = 0.02; but not public health/facility reasons), CFS (P = 0.04), prior ischaemic heart disease (P = 0.01) and dementia (P = 0.02). For patients with COVID-19, 28-day mortality was associated with initial oxygen saturation (P = 0.02), delirium (P < 0.001) and hospital transfer for acuity (P = 0.01), but not public health/facility reasons., Conclusion: Unvaccinated aged care residents meeting COVID-19 testing criteria seen by InReach during a pandemic experience high mortality rates, including with negative swab result. Residents remaining within-facility (with InReach) experienced similar adjusted mortality odds to residents transferred to hospital for public health/facility-based reasons, and lower than those transferred for clinical acuity., (© 2022 The Authors. Internal Medicine Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australasian College of Physicians.)