Are memory clinics effective? The odds are in favour of their benefit, but conclusive evidence is not yet available

[The Cost of Early Diagnosis of Cognitive Decline in German Memory Clinics]

Dementias are expensive diseases: the net annual cost in European healthcare is about € 28.000 per case with a strong stage dependency, of which medical care accounts for about 19%. Diagnostic costs, on the other hand, account for only a small proportion of the total costs. With changes in the guidelines, biomarker tests are becoming increasingly important. At present, the concrete economic impact of biomarker-based diagnosis is largely unknown. To determine the actual costs of diagnostic procedures based on guidelines, we conducted a survey among the members of the German Memory Clinic Network (DNG). From 15 expert centres, the staff engagement time for all procedures was collected. Based on the individual engagement times of the different professions, the total of personnel costs for diagnostics was calculated using current gross personnel costs. The total sum of diagnostic costs (personnel plus procedures) was calculated for three different scenarios e. g. € 633,97 for diagnostics without biomarkers, € 1.214,90 for diagnostics with CSF biomarkers and € 4.740,58 € for diagnostics with FDG- plus Amyloid-PET. In addition, the actual diagnostic costs of the current practice in expert memory clinics were estimated, taking into account personnel costs, costs for the different procedures and the frequency of their use across all patients. This results in total average costs of € 1.394,43 per case as the mean across all centres (personnel costs € 351,72, costs for diagnostic procedures € 1.042,71). The results show that state-of-the-art diagnosis of dementia and pre-dementia states, such as mild cognitive impairment (MCI) requires financial resources, which are currently not fully reimbursed in Germany. The need for a biomarker-based etiological diagnosis of dementia and pre-dementia states will increase, due to availability of disease-modifying treatments. Therefore, the current gap of reimbursement must be filled by new models of compensation.

Dementia services for people from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic and White-British communities: Does a primary care based model contribute to equality in service provision?

This study set out to investigate whether there were disparities in service provision for people from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) communities compared to White British (WB) communities within a primary care led dementia service in the UK. Data were extracted from 30 cases from three BAME (African-Caribbean, South Asian and Chinese) communities who had been referred to a dementia service between April 2016 and December 2017. We then extracted data from 30 WB cases matched for gender, age (within 5 years) and General Practitioner surgery. We compared service provision for both samples around assessment, diagnosis and post-diagnostic support. The primary source of information in the BAME sample was less likely to be recorded as being the main carer and more likely to be an adult child. Cases from both samples were equally likely to have a CT scan. People from BAME communities were less likely to receive a cognitive assessment, and when they did they scored at a lower level. There was no difference between samples for the diagnoses that cases received, but BAME cases were more likely to be assessed as being low rather than medium or high risk. While cases from both samples were equally likely to receive medication, BAME cases were more likely to be seen by a psychiatrist. Significantly more people from the WB sample were recorded as using or being offered more than one form of community support. This study of a primary care-based dementia service suggests that while many areas of service provision showed no evidence of inequality, important differences remain including the time at which people present for assessment and the range of post-diagnostic services which are discussed. Further research is required to establish the likely causes of these disparities.

Evaluating a Memory Clinic Using the RE-AIM Model. The Experience of the "Memory and Neuropsychiatry Clinic" in Hospital Del Salvador, Chile

The development of healthcare services for dementia is key to improving access to care and post-diagnostic support for people living with dementia. Memory Units have emerged as a new healthcare service composed of multidisciplinary teams with the goal of improving diagnosis and/or management of dementia patients. The main objective of this study was to describe and evaluate the Reach and Effectiveness of a Memory Unit in a public hospital in Chile, using the RE-AIM model, a multi-component model that allows for the evaluation of the implementation of ongoing healthcare programs. Regarding “R” (Reach): from March 2018 up to June 2019, a total of 510 patients were referred and assessed. Most patients came from primary care (51.9%) and from outpatient services at the Hospital Salvador (39.2%), particularly from the Neurology (63.3%) and Psychiatry (16.0%) departments. We estimated that our Memory Unit assessed 5.39% of all of the dementia patients living in the area of referral. With respect to “E” (Effectiveness): 419 patients are still being followed up at the Memory Unit. Ninety-one patients (18%) were discharged. Of these, 55 (66%) were referred to primary healthcare, 28 (31%) to other outpatient services, 9 (10%) to a specialized mental healthcare center, and 9 (10%) to a daycare center. Due to the short period of time that the Memory Unit has been operating, no other RE-AIM dimensions could be evaluated at this juncture. To our knowledge, this is the first implementation study of a Memory Unit in Latin America, and the first using the RE-AIM model. Although cultural differences worldwide might play a role in the lack of international guidelines, the publication of the experience of the first year of this unit in Chile could inform new countries about this process. Ongoing challenges include continuing to collect data to complement the RE-AIM evaluation and developing a protocol that can be adopted elsewhere in Chile and Latin America. Further studies are needed to assess the benefits of a Memory Unit in comparison to regular care and to develop a model that assures continuity and coordination of care for people with dementia.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of English memory assessment services 2 years after first consultation for patients with dementia

OBJECTIVES

This paper aims to compare changes over 2 years in patients' health-related quality of life (HRQL) with the health and social care costs of diagnosis and treatment of people newly referred to memory assessment services (MAS).

METHODS

We analysed observational data from 1318 patients referred to 69 MAS who completed resource use and HRQL questionnaires at baseline 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. We reported mean differences in HRQL (disease-specific DEMQOL and generic EQ-5D-3 L), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs and cost-effectiveness between baseline, and 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Two years after referral to MAS, patients reported a higher DEMQOL score (mean gain 4.47, 95% confidence interval, 3.08-5.90) and EQ-5D-3 L (0.014, -0.011 to 0.039). Mean total costs and QALYs over 24 months was £2411 (£1721-£2873) and 0.027 (0.003-0.051), respectively. Assuming that patients' HRQL would not have altered over the 2 years had they not attended MAS, these outcomes suggest an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £89 546 (£38 123-£145 864) based on changes in EQ-5D-3 L. If we assumed that patients' HRQL would have declined by about 10% over this period had they not attended MAS, the cost-effectiveness ratio would be £25 056. The largest MAS (N = 32; 46%) with over 50 new patients a month were more likely to be cost-effective than smaller ones (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

MAS are effective and can be cost-effective for diagnosing and treating people with suspected dementia. Large variations in costs between clinics suggest that many MAS could improve their cost-effectiveness.

Memory assessment services and health-related quality of life: 1-year follow-up

OBJECTIVES

Our group has already demonstrated that patients' health-related quality of life (HRQL) improves in the first 6 months after their first appointment at memory assessment services (MASs), but the sustainability of such gains is unknown. We aimed to describe changes in patients' HRQL at 12 months after their first MAS appointment and to examine associations with patient and MAS characteristics.

METHODS

We collected data from 702 patients and 452 lay caregivers at the first appointment and 12 months later. Multivariable linear regression was used to examine the relationships of change in HRQL (self-reported and proxy-reported) with patients' characteristics and use of post-diagnostic interventions, and multilevel models were used to analyse the relationships of HRQL with MAS characteristics.

RESULTS

In the whole group, self-reported HRQL improved over 12 months (+3.5 points, 95% CI 2.7 to 4.2). Among people diagnosed with dementia, improvement in HRQL was more than double that among those with mild cognitive impairment or no diagnosis. Proxy-reported HRQL improved only in those diagnosed with dementia (+1.2 points, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.2). Changes in HRQL were not associated with any patient characteristics. The only feature of MASs associated with larger improvements in HRQL was the presence of advisory and support staff.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvements in HRQL observed at 6 months are maintained up to 1 year after the first MAS appointment, more so among those who receive a diagnosis of dementia. Continued follow-up will determine if the improvement is even longer lasting.

Change in Health-related Quality of Life After Referral to Memory Assessment Services

Despite strong support for the provision of memory assessment services (MASs) in England and other countries, their effectiveness in improving patient outcomes is uncertain. We aimed to describe change in patients' health-related quality of life (HRQL) 6 months after referral to MASs and to examine associations with patient characteristics and use of postdiagnostic interventions. Data from 883 patients referred to 69 MASs and their informal caregivers (n=569) were collected at referral and 6 months later. Multivariable linear regression was used to examine associations of change in HRQL (DEMQOL, DEMQOL-Proxy) with patient characteristics (age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation, and comorbidity) and use of postdiagnostic interventions (antidementia medications and nonpharmacological therapies). Mean HRQL improved, irrespective of diagnosis: self-reported HRQL increased 3.4 points (95% CI, 2.7-4.1) and proxy-reported HRQL 1.3 points (95% CI, 0.5-2.1). HRQL change was not associated with any of the patient characteristics studied. Patients with dementia (54%) receiving antidementia drugs reported greater improvement in their HRQL but those using nonpharmacological therapies reported less improvement compared with those note receiving therapy. HRQL improved in the first 6 months after referral to MASs. Research is needed to determine longer term sustainability of the benefits and the cost-effectiveness of MASs.

The cost of diagnosis and early support in patients with cognitive decline

OBJECTIVE

Recent research indicates considerable heterogeneity in the provision of memory assessment services (MAS). However, little is known on the extent of variation in the costs of the services MAS provide. We investigated the costs of supporting patients with suspected dementia, including assessment and support over the following 6 months.

METHODS

Clinic costs were estimated on the basis of an organisational survey reporting staff roll, grade and activities. Costs of primary health and social care were estimated from questionnaire data reported by carers of patients at baseline, 3 and 6 months after referral.

RESULTS

Mean monthly staff costs at MAS were £73 000. Imaging at assessment costs an additional £3500 per month. Monthly clinic cost per new patient assessed varied from £320 to £5400 across clinics. Additional primary health and social care costs of £130-220 a month between baseline and 6 months were reported by carers. Costs of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments reported by carers were small. Informal care costs dwarfed health and social care costs when valued at a modest unit cost. The overall mean cost of supporting a patient for 6 months varied from £1600 to £2500 dependent on assumptions regarding the proportion of MAS intervention and review costs accrued at 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable variation in the intensity and associated costs of services provided by MAS. Further research should ascertain to what extent such variation is associated with differences in patient outcomes. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A national survey of memory clinics in the Republic of Ireland

BACKGROUND

This national survey investigates the location, resourcing, staff composition, treatments, waiting time, and numbers of patients attending memory clinics (MCs) in the Republic of Ireland. It also explores Directors' attitudes to future service development including their views about the advantages and disadvantages of quality standards for MCs.

METHODS

An audio-taped telephone interview was conducted with the Directors.

RESULTS

A total of 14 MCs were identified across the Republic of Ireland, ten of which are hospital-based and most of which offer diagnostic services and are located in Dublin. Nine MCs are medical consultant led and operate under the direction of either Old Age Psychiatrists or Geriatricians. Results show wide variation regarding the location, team size, service availability, and numbers of patients attending. The average number of patients attending in 2011 was 126. Only six clinics employ dedicated Allied Health Professionals. Less than half of the clinics are research active. Whilst most Directors welcomed the availability of national standards, several expressed concern that standards might, in the absence of funding, result in the closure of the most poorly resourced services.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey provides valuable data on the main characteristics of all of the 14 MCs delivering services in the Republic of Ireland and raises critical and fundamental questions about the goals and outcomes of MC services. The survey data collected can be used by other countries for cross-national comparison.

Cost-effectiveness of one year dementia follow-up care by memory clinics or general practitioners: economic evaluation of a randomised controlled trial

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of post-diagnosis dementia treatment and coordination of care by memory clinics compared to general practitioners’ care.

Methods

A multicentre randomised trial with 175 community dwelling patients newly diagnosed with mild to moderate dementia, and their informal caregivers, with twelve months’ follow-up. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated from a societal point of view and presented as incremental cost per quality adjusted life year. To establish cost-effectiveness, a cost-utility analysis was conducted using utilities based on the EQ-5D. Uncertainty surrounding the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (difference in costs divided by difference in effects) was calculated by bootstrapping from the original data.

Results

Compared to general practitioners’ care, treatment by the memory clinics was on average €1024 (95% CI: −€7723 to €5674) cheaper, and showed a non-significant decrease of 0.025 (95% CI: −0.114 to 0.064) quality adjusted life years. The incremental cost-effectiveness point estimate from the bootstrap simulation was € 41 442 per QALY lost if one would use memory clinic care instead of general practitioner care.

Conclusion

No evidence was found that memory clinics were more cost-effective compared to general practitioners with regard to post-diagnosis treatment and coordination of care of patients with dementia in the first year after diagnosis.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00554047

Effectiveness of multidisciplinary care for Parkinson's disease: a randomized, controlled trial

Multidisciplinary care is considered an optimal model to manage Parkinson's disease (PD), but supporting evidence is limited. We performed a randomized, controlled trial (RCT) to establish whether a multidisciplinary/specialist team offers better outcomes, compared to stand-alone care from a general neurologist. Patients with PD were randomly allocated to an intervention group (care from a movement disorders specialist, PD nurses, and social worker) or a control group (care from general neurologists). Both interventions lasted 8 months. Clinicians and researchers were blinded for group allocation. The primary outcome was the change in quality of life (Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire; PDQ-39) from baseline to 8 months. Other outcomes were the UPDRS, depression (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Scale; MADRS), psychosocial functioning (Scales for Outcomes in Parkinson's disease-Psychosocial; SCOPA-PS), and caregiver strain (Caregiver Strain Index; CSI). Group differences were analyzed using analysis of covariance adjusted for baseline values and presence of response fluctuations. A total of 122 patients were randomized and 100 completed the study (intervention, n = 51; control, n = 49). Compared to controls, the intervention group improved significantly on PDQ-39 (difference, 3.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.5-6.2) and UPDRS motor scores (4.1; 95% CI: 0.8-7.3). UPDRS total score (5.6; 95% CI: 0.9-10.3), MADRS (3.7; 95% CI: 1.4-5.9), and SCOPA-PS (2.1; 95% CI: 0.5-3.7) also improved significantly. This RCT gives credence to a multidisciplinary/specialist team approach. We interpret these positive findings cautiously because of the limitations in study design. Further research is required to assess teams involving additional disciplines and to evaluate cost-effectiveness of integrated approaches. © 2012 Movement Disorder Society.

Progress in diagnosis and management of Alzheimer's disease

Purpose

Knowledge of Alzheimer's disease (AD), timely recognition and good management should be the norm in all health and social care settings. This paper seeks to focus on developments in diagnosis and treatment.

Design/methodology/approach

Key research papers and policy documents published in the last few years are reviewed, with an emphasis on those most relevant to Wales.

Findings

The number of people with AD is predicted to steadily increase over the next 40 years. Recent policy developments have recognised the importance of better identification and management of dementia and have proposed memory clinics as the core of new services for early diagnosis and identification. Newer biomarkers of AD enable diagnosis to be made more reliably and at a stage before the patient is demented (prodromal AD). Latest guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) now recommends that the use of anticholinesterase inhibitor drugs or memantine is considered in all patients with AD. There is active research into newer treatment approaches, notably the role of cognitive rehabilitation in early dementia and the use of potentially disease‐modifying drugs such as anti‐amyloid antibodies. Unfortunately, current research funding is inadequate and only a small minority of people with AD become involved with research.

Originality/value

The paper shows that, given the growing importance of AD, there is an urgent need to boost recruitment of people with dementia into research trials. There is also a need to address ethical considerations of diagnosing prodromal AD – this is important for both the person undergoing assessment and for society as a whole.

Effectiveness of dementia follow-up care by memory clinics or general practitioners: randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effectiveness of post-diagnosis dementia treatment and coordination of care by memory clinics compared with general practitioners.

DESIGN

Multicentre randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Nine memory clinics and 159 general practitioners in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

175 patients with a new diagnosis of mild to moderate dementia living in the community and their informal caregivers.

INTERVENTIONS

Usual care provided by memory clinic or general practitioner.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Caregiver rated quality of life of the patient measured with the quality of life in Alzheimer's disease instrument and self perceived burden of the informal caregiver measured with the sense of competence questionnaire (intention to treat analysis).

RESULTS

The quality of life of the patients in the memory clinic group was 0.5 (95% confidence interval -0.7 to 1.6) points higher than in the general practitioner group. Caregivers' burden was 2.4 (-5.8 to 1.0) points lower in the memory clinic group than in the general practitioner group.

CONCLUSION

No evidence was found that memory clinics were more effective than general practitioners with regard to post-diagnosis treatment and coordination care for patients with dementia. Without further evidence on the effectiveness of these modalities, other arguments, such as cost minimisation, patients' preferences, or regional health service planning, can determine which type of dementia care is offered.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trials NCT00554047.

Development of memory clinics in the Netherlands: 1998 to 2009

OBJECTIVES

Memory clinics (MCs) are multidisciplinary teams involved with early diagnosis and treatment of people with dementia. The main aim of this study was to gain more insight into the development of MCs in the Netherlands since 1998.

METHODS

In 1998, 2004 and 2009, an MC survey with questions about patient groups, organisation and working procedures of the MC were sent to all MCs in the Netherlands.

RESULTS

The number of MCs increased from 12 in 1998, to 43 in 2004 and to 63 in 2009. In 2009, MCs were better embedded with other regional care and were delivering services for dementia with less emphasis on university-based research. While dementia was still the most common syndromal diagnosis, the proportion of subjects diagnosed with milder memory problems increased to 39%. Diagnostic tools, blood assessments and brain imaging were used in nearly all the facilities. There was an increase both in the use of extensive neuropsychological assessments and in the use of cerebrospinal fluid diagnostics.

CONCLUSION

MCs in the Netherlands have outgrown the primarily university-based setting, have focussed less on scientific research, and have taken a place in the regular care of people with cognitive problems and people in early phases of dementia.