Implement a memory impairment screening procedure for elderly Hispanic primary care patients, and analyze its yield and challenges to further triage and diagnostic evaluation.
Three hundred twenty nine Hispanic patients aged ≥60 years or proxy informants were enrolled from outpatient primary care clinics at an urban safety-net medical center. Patients were screened for memory impairment using the WHO-UCLA AVLT; for those without consent capacity, proxies were given the IQCODE. Bilingual research assistants conducted in-person or telephone screening. Age, gender, education, comorbidities, acculturation, overall health, access to care, and memory concerns were assessed as potential predictors of memory impairment. Based on identified implementation challenges, a multi-disciplinary stakeholder committee proposed revised approaches to increase diagnostic evaluation and sustainability.
Of 677 eligible patients approached, 329 (49%) were screened, and 77 (23%) met criteria for memory impairment using the WHO-UCLA AVLT (N=60) or the IQCODE (N=17). Only male gender and higher comorbidity uniquely predicted memory impairment (ps<0.05). Few screen-positive patients declined further triage and evaluation, but a substantial proportion could not be subsequently contacted. Challenges to implementing a memory screening program included staff time and adequate clinic space for in-person screening; challenges to follow-up of positive screening results included inability to contact patients and lack of primary care continuity to facilitate further triage and referral.
Nearly one-fourth of primary care Hispanic elders screened as memory-impaired, but few factors predicted positive screening. Stakeholder-guided adaptations are needed-particularly in resource-constrained settings-to overcome challenges to further diagnostic evaluation and referral.
"Thus, among Latino adults there is a substantial burden of unrecognized dementia. This finding is consistent with previous reports in both Latino and non-Latino populations (Callahan, Hendrie, & Tierney, 1995; Harris et al., 2011; Knopman, Donohue, & Gutterman, 2000). Using the case conference diagnosis as the gold standard, accuracy of screening with the pFCSRT+IR and the MMSE was assessed across a range of cut scores. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The purpose was to compare the Spanish language picture version of the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test with Immediate Recall (pFCSRT+IR) and the Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) in identifying very mild dementia among Spanish speaking Latino patients. The tests and an independent diagnostic assessment were administered to 112 Latino patients free of medically diagnosed dementia from an urban primary care clinic. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the area under the curve (AUC) were used to examine differences in the operating characteristics of the pFCSRT+IR and the MMSE. Cut scores were manipulated to equate sensitivities (specificities) at clinically relevant values to compare differences in specificities (sensitivities) using the Pearson Chi Square test. Youden's index was used to select the optimal cut scores. Twenty-four of the 112 primary care patients (21%) received a research dementia diagnosis, indicating a substantial burden of unrecognized dementia. MMSE scores but not free recall scores were associated with years of education in patients free of dementia. AUC was significantly higher for free recall than for MMSE. Free recall performed significantly better than the MMSE in sensitivity and in specificity. Using optimal cut scores, patients with impaired free recall were 10 times more likely to have dementia than patients with intact recall, and patients with impaired MMSE scores were 4.5 times more likely to have dementia than patients with intact scores. These results suggest that the Spanish language pFCSRT+IR may be an effective tool for dementia screening in educationally diverse Latino primary care populations. (JINS, 2014, 20, 1-8).
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 08/2014; 20(08):1-8. DOI:10.1017/S1355617714000708 · 2.96 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To determine individuals' perceptions concerning dementia screening and to evaluate the possibility of an association between their perceptions and their willingness to undergo screening.
Cross-sectional study of primary care patients aged 65 and older.
Urban primary care clinics in Indianapolis, Indiana, in 2008 to 2009.
Five hundred fifty-four primary care patients without a documented diagnosis of dementia.
The Perceptions Regarding Investigational Screening for Memory in Primary Care Questionnaire (PRISM-PC) and agreement or refusal to undergo dementia screening.
Of the 554 study participants who completed the PRISM-PC, 65.5% were aged 70 and older, 70.0% were female, and 56.5% were African American; 57 (10.3%) refused screening for dementia. Of the 497 (89.7%) who agreed to screening, 63 (12.7%) screened positive. After adjusting for age, perception of depression screening, perception of colon cancer screening, and belief that no treatment is currently available for Alzheimer's disease, the odds of refusing screening were significantly lower in participants who had higher PRISM-PC domain scores for benefits of dementia screening (odds ratio (OR) = 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.75-0.97; P = .02). In the same regression model, the odds of refusing screening were significantly higher in participants aged 70 to 74 (OR = 5.65, 95% CI = 2.27-14.09; P < .001) and those aged 75 to 79 (OR = 3.63, 95% CI = 1.32-9.99; P = .01) than in the reference group of patients aged 65 to 69.
Age and perceived benefit of screening are associated with acceptance of dementia screening in primary care.
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 06/2012; 60(6):1037-43. DOI:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.03991.x · 4.57 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.