Search

Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRDs) are a global crisis facing the aging population and society as a whole. With the numbers of people with ADRDs predicted to rise dramatically across the world, the scientific community can no longer neglect the need for research focusing on ADRDs among underrepresented ethnoracial diverse groups. The Alzheimer's Association International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment (ISTAART; alz.org/ISTAART) comprises a number of professional interest areas (PIAs), each focusing on a major scientific area associated with ADRDs. We leverage the expertise of the existing international cadre of ISTAART scientists and experts to synthesize a cross-PIA white paper that provides both a concise "state-of-the-science" report of ethnoracial factors across PIA foci and updated recommendations to address immediate needs to advance ADRD science across ethnoracial populations.

Background: Hearing loss is prevalent and consequential but under‐diagnosed and managed. The Medicare Annual Wellness Visit (AWV) health risk assessment elicits patient‐reported hearing concerns but whether such information affects documentation, diagnosis, or referral is unknown. Methods: We use 5 years of electronic medical record (EMR) data (2017–2022) for a sample of 13,776 older primary care patients. We identify the first (index) AWV indication of hearing concerns and existing and subsequent hearing loss EMR diagnoses (visit diagnoses or problem list diagnoses) and audiology referrals. For a 20% random sample of AWV notes (n = 474) we compared hearing loss EMR diagnoses to documentation of (1) hearing concerns, (2) hearing loss/aid use, and (3) referrals for hearing care. Results: Of 3845 (27.9%) older adults who identified hearing concerns (mean age 79.1 years, 57% female, 75% white) 24% had an existing hearing diagnosis recorded. Among 474 patients with AWV clinical notes reviewed, 90 (19%) had an existing hearing loss diagnosis. Clinicians were more likely to document hearing concerns or hearing loss/aid use for those with (vs. without) an existing EMR diagnosis (50.6% vs. 35.9%, p = 0.01; 68.9% vs. 37.5%, p < 0.001, respectively). EMR diagnoses of hearing loss were recorded for no more than 40% of those with indicated hearing concerns. Among those without prior diagnosis 38 (9.9%) received a hearing care referral within 1 month. Subgroup analysis suggest greater likelihood of documenting hearing concerns for patients age 80+ (OR:1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03, 2.19) and decreased likelihood of documenting known hearing loss among patients with more chronic conditions (OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.27, 0.9), with no differences observed by race. Conclusion: Documentation of hearing loss in EMR and AWV clinical notes is limited among older adults with subjective hearing concerns. Systematic support and incorporation of hearing into EMR and clinical notes may increase hearing loss visibility by care teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Delirium and dementia are common causes of cognitive impairment in older adults. They are distinct but interrelated. Delirium, an acute confusional state, has been linked to the chronic and progressive loss of cognitive ability seen in dementia. Individuals with dementia are at higher risk for delirium, and delirium itself is a risk factor for incident dementia. Additionally, delirium in individuals with dementia can hasten underlying cognitive decline. In this review, we summarize recent literature linking these conditions, including epidemiological, clinicopathological, neuroimaging, biomarker, and experimental evidence supporting the intersection between these conditions. Strategies for evaluation and diagnosis that focus on distinguishing delirium from dementia in clinical settings and recommendations for delirium prevention interventions for patients with dementia are presented. We also discuss studies that provide evidence that delirium may be a modifiable risk factor for dementia and consider the impact of delirium prevention interventions on long-term outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The surgical population is ageing and often frail. Frailty increases the risk for poor post-operative outcomes such as delirium, which carries significant morbidity, mortality and cost. Frailty is often measured in a binary manner, limiting pre-operative counselling. The goal of this study was to determine the relationship between categorical frailty severity level and post-operative delirium. Methods We performed an analysis of a retrospective cohort of older adults from 12 January 2018 to 3 January 2020 admitted to a tertiary medical center for elective surgery. All participants underwent frailty screening prior to inpatient elective surgery with at least two post-operative delirium assessments. Planned ICU admissions were excluded. Procedures were risk-stratified by the Operative Stress Score (OSS). Categorical frailty severity level (Not Frail, Mild, Moderate, and Severe Frailty) was measured using the Edmonton Frail Scale. Delirium was determined using the 4 A's Test and Confusion Assessment Method-Intensive Care Unit. Results In sum, 324 patients were included. The overall post-operative delirium incidence was 4.6% (15 individuals), which increased significantly as the categorical frailty severity level increased (2% not frail, 6% mild frailty, 23% moderate frailty; P  < 0.001) corresponding to increasing odds of delirium (OR 2.57 [0.62, 10.66] mild vs. not frail; OR 12.10 [3.57, 40.99] moderate vs. not frail). Conclusions Incidence of post-operative delirium increases as categorical frailty severity level increases. This suggests that frailty severity should be considered when counselling older adults about their risk for post-operative delirium prior to surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Delirium is a common complication of older people in hospitals, rehabilitation and long-term facilities. Objective To assess the worldwide use of validated delirium assessment tools and the presence of delirium management protocols. Design Secondary analysis of a worldwide one-day point prevalence study on World Delirium Awareness Day, 15 March 2023. Setting Cross-sectional online survey including hospitals, rehabilitation and long-term facilities. Methods Participating clinicians reported data on delirium, the presence of protocols, delirium assessments, delirium-awareness interventions, non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions, and ward/unit-specific barriers. Results Data from 44 countries, 1664 wards/units and 36 048 patients were analysed. Validated delirium assessments were used in 66.7% (n  = 1110) of wards/units, 18.6% (n  = 310) used personal judgement or no assessment, and 10% (n  = 166) used other assessment methods. A delirium management protocol was reported in 66.8% (n  = 1094) of wards/units. The presence of protocols for delirium management varied across continents, ranging from 21.6% (on 21/97 wards/units) in Africa to 90.4% (235/260) in Australia, similar to the use of validated delirium assessments with 29.6% (29/98) in Africa to 93.5% (116/124) in North America. Wards/units with a delirium management protocol [ n  = 1094/1664, 66.8%] were more likely to use a validated delirium test than those without a protocol [odds ratio 6.97 (95% confidence interval 5.289–9.185)]. The presence of a delirium protocol increased the chances for valid delirium assessment and, likely, evidence-based interventions. Conclusion Wards/units that reported the presence of delirium management protocols had a higher probability of using validated delirium assessments tools to assess for delirium. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

IntroductionPlasma levels of amyloid-beta (Aβ) do not correlate well with different stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in cross-sectional studies. Measuring the changes in Aβ plasma levels with an acute intervention may be more sensitive to distinguishing individuals in earlier stages of AD (mild cognitive impairment; MCI) from normal controls.Methods57 participants (18 with AD/MCI and 39 cognitively normal controls) underwent oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT). Blood samples were obtained over a 2 hour time period. Changes in plasma Aβ40 and42 levels were measured from either baseline or 5 minutes to the 10 minute time point.ResultsCompared to normal controls, subjects with AD/MCI had significantly less change (Δ) in plasma levels for both Aβ40(-3.13(40.93)pg/ml vs. 41.34(57.16)pg/ml;p=0.002) and Aβ42(-0.15(3.77)pg/ml vs. 5.64(10.65)pg/ml; p=0.004).DiscussionOGTT combined with measures of plasma Aβ40 and 42 is potentially useful in distinguishing aging individuals who are in different stages of AD.

Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review was to assess studies of treating hearing loss in older adults with cognitive impairment. Of interest to this review is identifying clinical adaptations that may be used to tailor hearing loss treatment to older adults with cognitive impairment in order to better serve this vulnerable population. Method: A systematic search with controlled vocabulary and key word terms was applied to PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Search concepts included terms related to hearing loss and cognitive impairment. The overall search resulted in 4,945 unique references, 50 of which were eligible for full-text review and 13 of which were included in the final review. Included manuscripts were categorized according to the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's levels of evidence and the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tools. Results: Only 1 study implemented a randomized controlled trial design to assess cognitive function and behavioral symptoms after treatment with hearing aids. Other quasiexperimental studies evaluated dementia-related symptoms and/or auditory function after treating hearing loss in pre/post research designs. Finally, evidence from case studies suggested that hearing loss treatment is feasible, reduces stressful communication for caregivers, and improves dementia-related behavior problems. Conclusion: Based on the systematic review, evidence suggests that treating hearing loss in persons with cognitive impairment can have benefits to communication and quality of life. Because of the quasi- and nonexperimental nature of most of the evidence found in this review, further studies are necessary to understand the effect of treatment in the context of a variable and progressive disease.

Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRDs) and age‐related hearing loss are the intersection of two major public health challenges. With age as the primary risk factor for both disease processes, the burden of ADRDs and age‐related hearing loss is growing, and each field maintains significant barriers to broadscale identification and management that is affordable and accessible. With the disproportionate burden of ADRDs among racial and ethnic minority older adults and existing disparities within hearing care, both areas face challenges in achieving equitable access and outcomes across diverse populations. The publication of the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders (ACHIEVE) trial in July 2023 marked a significant moment in the fields of brain and hearing health. The ACHIEVE trial was the first randomized controlled trial to examine whether providing hearing intervention, specifically provision of hearing aids, compared to an education control, would reduce cognitive changes over 3 years. The participants most at risk for cognitive decline, with lower education, lower income, more likely to identify as Black, and have more cardiovascular risk factors, were the participants who benefited most from the hearing intervention and are also the least likely to be represented in research and the least likely to obtain hearing care. With growing evidence of the interconnection between cognitive and sensory health, we have an opportunity to prioritize equity, from purposeful inclusion of diverse participants in trials to influencing the emerging market of over‐the‐counter hearing aids to supporting expanded models of hearing care that reach those who have traditionally gone unserved. No longer can hearing go unrecognized by clinicians, researchers, and advocates for brain health. At the same time, the fields of brain and hearing health must center equity if we are going to meet the needs of diverse older adults in a world in which hearing health matters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]