Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES: To describe the quality of dementia care within one U.S. metropolitan area and to investigate associations between variations in quality and patient, caregiver, and health system characteristics. DESIGN: Observational, cross-sectional. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred eighty-seven patient-caregiver pairs from three healthcare organizations MEASUREMENTS: Using caregiver surveys and medical record abstraction to assess 18 dementia care processes drawn from existing guidelines, the proportion adherent to each care process was calculated, as well as mean percentages of adherence aggregated within four care dimensions: assessment (6 processes), treatment (6 processes), education and support (3 processes), and safety (3 processes). For each dimension, associations between adherence and patient, caregiver, and health system characteristics were investigated using multivariable models. RESULTS: Adherence ranged from 9% to 79% for the 18 individual care processes; 11 processes had less than 40% adherence. Mean percentage adherence across the four care dimensions was 37% for assessment, 33% for treatment, 52% for education and support, and 21% for safety. Higher comorbidity was associated with greater adherence across all four dimensions, whereas greater caregiver knowledge (in particular, one item) was associated with higher care quality in three of four care dimensions. For selected dimensions, greater adherence was also associated with greater dementia severity and with more geriatrics or neurologist visits. CONCLUSION: In general, dementia care quality has considerable room for improvement. Although greater comorbidity and dementia severity were associated with better quality, caregiver knowledge was the most consistent caregiver characteristic associated with better adherence. These findings offer opportunities for targeting low quality and suggest potential focused interventions.

Memory impairment is the most frequent cognitive dysfunction for older patients. Though studies have shown that dementia is often overlooked in primary care settings, there has been minimal focus specifically on memory impairment, on patients' concerns about memory, or their desire to address these concerns. The objectives of this study were to (1) investigate the prevalence of memory impairment among patients without dementia diagnoses, (2) determine the degree of patients' concern about memory impairment and (3) identify other patient characteristics associated with memory impairment among older primary care patients. Using telephone versions of a four-item memory test and proxy-reported cognitive decline for patients unable to complete interviews, we performed memory assessment of randomly selected patients, 75 years and older, without dementia diagnoses who see primary care physicians at least twice every six months. Among 260 patients and 20 proxies, 19.8% had memory impairment at a level indicative of probable dementia. Adjusting for age, ethnicity, and education, subjects who were more concerned about memory impairment were more likely to be impaired. (Adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 1.4 (for each additional level of concern); 95% confidence interval [CI]: (1.0-2.0)). Similarly, subjects wanting their physician to discuss with them their memory concerns were more likely to be impaired (AOR: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.0-1.9). Memory impairment is common among older primary care patients without diagnosed dementia. Knowing patients' concerns about memory impairment and their desire to discuss these concerns may facilitate cognitive screening in this setting.

OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of dementia continues to rise, and yet, there are few known modifiable risk factors. Depression, as a treatable condition, may be important in the development of dementia. Our objective was to examine the association between depressive symptoms and longitudinal cognitive changes in older adults who were high-functioning at baseline. METHODS: The authors analyzed data from a community-based cohort (aged 70-79 at baseline), who, at study entry, scored 7 or more (out of 9) on the Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ). Depressive symptoms were assessed at baseline using the depression subscale of the Hopkins Symptom Check List. Cognitive performance was measured at baseline and at seven-year follow up by the SPMSQ and by summary scores from standard tests of naming, construction, spatial recognition, abstraction, and delayed recall. RESULTS: After adjusting for potential confounders, including age, education, and chronic health conditions such as diabetes, heart attack, stroke, and hypertension, a higher number of baseline depressive symptoms were strongly associated with greater seven-year decline in cognitive performance and with higher odds of incident cognitive impairment, i.e., decline in SPMSQ score to < or = 6 (adjusted odds ratio per quartile of depressive symptoms score: 1.34, 95% confidence interval: 1.10-1.68). CONCLUSIONS: Depressive symptomatology independently predicts cognitive decline and incident cognitive impairment in previously high-functioning older persons.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to dementia guidelines is poor despite evidence that some guideline recommendations can improve symptoms and delay institutionalization of patients. OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of a dementia guideline-based disease management program on quality of care and outcomes for patients with dementia. DESIGN: Clinic-level, cluster randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: 3 health care organizations collaborating with 3 community agencies in southern California. PARTICIPANTS: 18 primary care clinics and 408 patients with dementia age 65 years or older paired with 408 informal caregivers. INTERVENTION: Disease management program led by care managers and provided to 238 patient-caregiver pairs at 9 intervention clinics for more than 12 months. MEASUREMENTS: Adherence to 23 guideline recommendations (primary outcome) and receipt of community resources and patient and caregiver health and quality-of-care measures (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: The mean percentage of per-patient guideline recommendations to which care was adherent was significantly higher in the intervention group than in the usual care group (63.9% vs. 32.9%, respectively; adjusted difference, 30.1% [95% CI, 25.2% to 34.9%]; P < 0.001). Participants who received the intervention had higher care quality on 21 of 23 guidelines (P < or = 0.013 for all), and higher proportions received community agency assistance (P < or = 0.03) than those who received usual care. Patient health-related quality of life, overall quality of patient care, caregiving quality, social support, and level of unmet caregiving assistance needs were better for participants in the intervention group than for those in the usual care group (P < 0.05 for all). Caregiver health-related quality of life did not differ between the 2 groups. LIMITATIONS: Participants were well-educated, were predominantly white, had a usual source of care, and were not institutionalized. Generalizability to other patients and geographic regions is unknown. Also, costs of a care management program under fee-for-service reimbursement may impede adoption. CONCLUSIONS: A dementia guideline-based disease management program led to substantial improvements in quality of care for patients with dementia. Current Controlled Trials identifier: ISRCTN72577751.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of a multicomponent dementia care management program on primary care provider knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of quality of dementia care. DESIGN: A clinic-level randomized, controlled trial of a comprehensive care management program for patients with dementia and their nonprofessional caregivers. The program included provider education and protocols for care managers to communicate with patients' medical providers. SETTING: Eighteen clinics (nine intervention, nine [corrected] usual care) in three healthcare systems in San Diego, California. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred thirty-two medical providers; 129 from nine [corrected] intervention clinics; 103 from nine [corrected] usual-care clinics. MEASUREMENTS: Providers were surveyed 9 months after intervention onset on knowledge (five items on four topics), attitudes about dementia (three items), and perception of quality of dementia care in their practice setting (three items). Multivariable linear and logistic regression models were used to evaluate the differences between intervention and usual-care providers, adjusting for covariate effects across groups and clustering by clinic. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-six of 232 (72%) providers responded. Intervention providers had better knowledge about assessing decision-making capacity than usual-care providers (adjusted difference in percentage correct = 12%; adjusted odds ratio = 2.4, 95% confidence interval = 1.2-4.8). Intervention providers viewed dementia patients as more difficult to manage in primary care than usual-care providers (P = .03). There were no other differences in knowledge, attitudes, or care quality perceptions across intervention and usual-care providers. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive dementia care management model resulted in few differences in provider knowledge or attitudes favorable to dementia care, suggesting that this care model's effects on quality were primarily mediated through other components of the care management program.

Elevated glucocorticoid levels have been associated with cognitive impairment, including dementia. However, few longitudinal studies have examined the association between resting cortisol levels and the incidence of cognitive impairment. We measured overnight urinary excretion of cortisol in 538 high-functioning men and women, 70-79 years of age, in 1988, and assessed their cognitive functioning in 1988, 1991, and 1995 using the short portable mental status questionnaire (SPMSQ). Compared to participants in the bottom quartile of urinary cortisol at baseline, those in the top three quartiles had higher risk of incident cognitive impairment over the 7-year follow up (i.e., decline in SPMSQ score to below six out of nine). This association was not affected by adjustment for age, gender, education level, ethnicity, smoking, prevalent cardiovascular disease, and blood pressure (adjusted odds ratio for the highest quartile 2.34, 95% confidence interval, 1.07-5.14). There was no effect modification by gender; the association was equally strong in men and women. We conclude that urinary excretion of cortisol predicts incident cognitive impairment in older men and women.

BACKGROUND: Although enthusiasm is growing for self-management programs for chronic conditions, there are conflicting data regarding their effectiveness and no agreement on their essential components. PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness and essential components of self-management programs for hypertension, osteoarthritis, and diabetes mellitus. DATA SOURCES: The authors searched multiple sources dated through September 2004, including the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Nursing and Allied Health databases, and bibliographies of 87 previous reviews. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials that compared outcomes of self-management interventions with a control or with usual care for diabetes mellitus, osteoarthritis, or hypertension; outcomes included hemoglobin A1c level, fasting blood glucose level, weight, blood pressure, pain, or function. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently identified trials and extracted data regarding whether the intervention used tailored adjustments to meet individual patient needs, a group setting, feedback, and psychological services, and whether the intervention was provided by the patient's usual physician. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 780 studies screened, 53 studies contributed data to the random-effects meta-analysis (26 diabetes studies, 14 osteoarthritis studies, and 13 hypertension studies). Self-management interventions led to a statistically and clinically significant pooled effect size of -0.36 (95% CI, -0.52 to -0.21) for hemoglobin A1c, equivalent to a reduction in hemoglobin A1c level of about 0.81%. Self-management interventions decreased systolic blood pressure by 5 mm Hg (effect size, -0.39 [CI, -0.51 to -0.28]) and decreased diastolic blood pressure by 4.3 mm Hg (effect size, -0.51 [CI, -0.73 to -0.30]). Pooled effects of self-management interventions were statistically significant but clinically trivial for pain and function outcomes for osteoarthritis. No consistent results supported any of the 5 characteristics examined as essential for program success. LIMITATIONS: Studies had variable quality, and possible publication bias was evident. CONCLUSIONS: Self-management programs for diabetes mellitus and hypertension probably produce clinically important benefits. The elements of the programs most responsible for benefits cannot be determined from existing data, and this inhibits specification of optimally effective or cost-effective programs. Osteoarthritis self-management programs do not appear to have clinically beneficial effects on pain or function.