Characterizing PRN Use of Psychotropic Medications for Acute Agitation in Canadian Long-Term Care Residents with Dementia Before and During COVID-19.

Background: Agitation is a disabling neuropsychiatric symptom of dementia. Pro re nata (PRN) injections of psychotropics can be administered for severe acute agitation, but little is known about the frequency of their actual use. Objective: Characterize actual use of injectable PRN psychotropics for severe acute agitation in Canadian long-term care (LTC) residents with dementia and compare use before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Residents from two Canadian LTC facilities with orders for PRN haloperidol, olanzapine, or lorazepam between January 1, 2018- May 1, 2019 (i.e., pre-COVID-19) and January 1, 2020- May 1, 2021 (i.e., COVID-19) were identified. Electronic medical records were reviewed to document PRN injections of psychotropic medications and collect data on reason and demographic characteristics. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize frequency, dose, and indications of use, and multivariate regression models were used to compare use between time periods. Results: Of the 250 residents, 45 of 103 (44%) people in the pre-COVID-19 period and 85 of 147 (58%) people in the COVID-19 period with standing orders for PRN psychotropics received ≥1 injections. Haloperidol was the most frequently used agent in both time periods (74% (155/209 injections) pre-COVID-19; 81% (323/398 injections) during COVID-19). Residents in the COVID-19 period were almost two times more likely to receive injections compared with those in the pre-COVID-19 period (odds ratio = 1.96; 95% CI = 1.15-3.34; p = 0.01). Conclusion: Our results suggest that use of PRN injections increased in LTC during the pandemic and contribute to the mounting evidence that agitation worsened during that time.

Identifying factors influencing cognitive outcomes after anodal transcranial direct current stimulation in older adults with and without cognitive impairment: A systematic review.

Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can improve cognition in healthy older adults, those with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), albeit with considerable variability in response. This systematic review identifies interindividual factors that may influence tDCS outcomes in older individuals with or without cognitive impairment. Peer-reviewed articles were included if they assessed whether cognitive outcomes (memory or global cognition) after tDCS were associated with pre-intervention factors in healthy older adults or individuals with AD/MCI. We identified eight factors that may affect cognitive outcomes after tDCS. Improved tDCS outcomes were predicted by lower baseline cognitive function when tDCS was combined with a co-intervention (but not when used alone). Preserved brain structure and better baseline functional connectivity, genetic polymorphisms, and the use of concomitant medications may predict better tDCS outcomes, but further research is warranted. tDCS outcomes were not consistently associated with age, cognitive reserve, sex, and AD risk factors. Accounting for individual differences in baseline cognition, particularly for combined interventions, may thus maximize the therapeutic potential of tDCS.

Pharmacological Management of Apathy in Dementia.

Apathy is a highly prevalent symptom of dementia. Despite its association with faster cognitive and functional decline, decreased quality of life and increased mortality, no therapies are currently approved to treat apathy. The objective of this review was to summarize the drugs that have been studied for apathy treatment in patients with dementia (specifically Alzheimer's disease [AD], Huntington's disease [HD] and Parkinson's disease [PD] dementia; dementia with Lewy bodies [DLB]; vascular dementia [VaD]; and frontotemporal dementia [FTD]) based on their putative mechanisms of action. A search for relevant studies was performed using ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that were available in English and included at least one drug intervention and an apathy measure scale. A total of 52 studies that included patients with AD (n = 33 studies), PD (n = 5), HD (n = 1), DLB (n = 1), FTD (n = 3), VaD (n = 1), VaD and AD (n = 4), VaD and mixed dementia (n = 1), and AD, VaD and mixed dementia (n = 3) were eligible for inclusion. These studies showed that methylphenidate, olanzapine, cholinesterase inhibitors, choline alphoscerate, citalopram, memantine, and mibampator are the only beneficial drugs in AD-related apathy. For PD-related apathy, only methylphenidate, rotigotine and rivastigmine showed benefits. Regarding FTD- and DLB-related apathy, initial studies with agomelatine and rivastigmine showed benefits, respectively. As for HD- and only-VaD-related apathy, no drugs demonstrated benefits. With regards to mixed populations, memantine, galantamine and gingko biloba showed effects on apathy in the AD plus VaD populations and nimodipine in the VaD plus mixed dementia populations. Of the drugs with positive results, some are already prescribed to patients with dementia to target other symptoms, some have characteristics-such as medical contraindications (e.g., cardiovascular) and adverse effects (e.g., gastrointestinal disturbances)-that limit their clinical use and some require further study. Future studies should investigate apathy as a primary outcome, making use of appropriate sample sizes and study durations to ensure durability of results. There should also be a consensus on using scales with high test/retest and interrater reliabilities to limit the inconsistencies between clinical trials. In conclusion, there are currently no US FDA-approved drugs that target apathy in dementia, so there is an ongoing need for the development of such drugs.