Discriminant Potential of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog) in Greek Older Adults with Subjective Cognitive Decline and Mild Cognitive Impairment.

Background: Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog) is a widely used screening tool for detecting older adults with Alzheimer's disease among their cognitively healthy peers. A previous study in Greek population showed that ADAS-Cog-Greek (G) is a valid tool and can identify people with Alzheimer's disease from older adult control group; however, there is no current data about whether ADAS-Cog can differentiate older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from those who have subjective cognitive decline (SCD). Objective: The current study aimed to examine the discriminant potential of ADAS-Cog-G in Greek older adults who meet the criteria for SCD or MCI. Methods: Four hundred eighty-two community-dwelling older adults, visitors of the Greek Alzheimer Association and Related Disorders, were enrolled in the current study. One hundred seventy-six of them met the criteria for SCD and three hundred six had MCI. Results: Path analysis applied to the data showed that age, as well as educational level affected ADAS-Cog-G performance. Results showed that the cut-off scores, which better discriminate people with SCD from MCI as well as their sensitivity and specificity values, were extracted in participants with high educational level (13 educational years<) and mainly under the age of 75 years. Conclusions: The current study provided evidence concerning the discriminant potential of ADAS-Cog-G to differentiate older adults with SCD from those with MCI in the Greek population, and therefore contributes to the relevant literature on the field.

Knowledge, familiarity, and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on barriers to seeking mental health services among older people: a cross-sectional study.

AIM: The COVID-19 pandemic caused drastic changes in older people's daily activities with a negative impact on their mental health, yet older people are less likely to seek mental health services. This study aims to explore the relationship between knowledge of and familiarity with mental health services, along with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and barriers to seeking mental health services among older people. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted with a convenience sample of 352 older people, recruited among community-dwelling adults who attended randomly selected postal offices and pension outlets. Three tools were used: a structured interview schedule for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of older people, the revised version of the Knowledge and Familiarity of Mental Health Services Scale (KFFMHS-R), and the Barriers to Mental Health Services Scale Revised (BMHSS-R). RESULTS: All participants reported experiencing mental health distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. Intrinsic barriers had a higher mean score than extrinsic barriers, and 27.4% of the variance of overall barriers to seeking mental health could be explained through regression analysis by familiarity, knowledge of mental health services, and age. Overall barriers explained 24.4% of the variance of older people's perceived distress as an impact of the COVID-19 pandemic (F = 22.160, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of mental health services was the most significant predictor of barriers to seeking mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Higher barriers predicted higher distress as an impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of the study suggest the need for a multidisciplinary mental health team for older people.

Usability of a self-administered geriatric assessment mHealth: Cross-sectional study in a geriatric clinic.

AIM: mHealth can facilitate comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in countries with limited geriatric healthcare facilities. It can compensate for the lack of trained geriatricians and integrate CGA in different healthcare disciplines leading to better clinical outcomes. This study assessed the usability of a self-administered geriatric assessment smartphone application. METHODS: A cross-sectional study included participants from the geriatric clinic at Ain Shams University Hospital, Cairo, Egypt. This study was performed in three phases: development and validation of an abbreviated geriatric assessment tool, and validation of the application prototype. Twenty subjects were recruited for pretesting the abbreviated assessment tool, then another 50 patients to validate this tool in a face-to-face interview. Afterwards, another 12 patients completed the prototype followed by a standardized office visit interview. Each assessment domain was evaluated in agreement with a valid reference test during the clinical interview. RESULTS: The application was simple and user friendly. The scores of each domain correlated to the reference test scores (rho = 0.59-0.93). Most of the domains exhibited good agreement with the reference tests (kappa = 0.68-1.00) (except for frailty and nutritional assessment). CONCLUSIONS: The mHealth geriatric assessment is possible and highly desirable during physical distancing and beyond. Obviously, this approach cannot substitute for clinical examination and multidisciplinary standard CGA. However, it may overcome some barriers facing the geriatrization of medicine. It would help general practitioners to provide pre-CGA evaluation, particularly in areas with limited access to formal geriatric healthcare services. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2021; 21: 222-228.