Age Alone is not Adequate to Determine Health-care Resource Allocation During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The Canadian Geriatrics Society (CGS) fosters the health and well-being of older Canadians and older adults worldwide. Although severe COVID-19 illness and significant mortality occur across the lifespan, the fatality rate increases with age, especially for people over 65 years of age. The dichotomization of COVID-19 patients by age has been proposed as a way to decide who will receive intensive care admission when critical care unit beds or ventilators are limited. We provide perspectives and evidence why alternative approaches should be used. METHODS: Practitioners and researchers in geriatric medicine and gerontology have led in the development of alternative approaches to using chronological age as the sole criterion for allocating medical resources. Evidence and ethical based recommendations are provided. RESULTS: Age alone should not drive decisions for health-care resource allocation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Decisions on health-care resource allocation should take into consideration the preferences of the patient and their goals of care, as well as patient factors like the Clinical Frailty Scale score based on their status two weeks before the onset of symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Age alone does not accurately capture the variability of functional capacities and physiological reserve seen in older adults. A threshold of 5 or greater on the Clinical Frailty Scale is recommended if this scale is utilized in helping to decide on access to limited health-care resources such as admission to a critical care unit and/or intubation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Diagnosis and treatment of dementia: 1. Risk assessment and primary prevention of Alzheimer disease.

BACKGROUND: In addition to nonmodifiable genetic risk factors, potentially modifiable factors such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia and environmental exposures have been identified as risk factors for Alzheimer disease. In this article, we provide physicians with practical guidance on risk assessment and primary prevention of Alzheimer disease based on recommendations from the Third Canadian Consensus Conference on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Dementia, held in March 2006. METHODS: We developed evidence-based guidelines using systematic literature searches, with specific criteria for study selection and quality assessment, and a clear and transparent decision-making process. We selected studies published from January 1996 to December 2005 that met the following criteria: dementia (all-cause, Alzheimer disease or vascular dementia) as the outcome; longitudinal cohort study; study population broadly reflective of Canadian demographics; and genetic risk factors and general risk factors (e.g., hypertension, education, occupation and chemical exposure) identified. We graded the strength of evidence using the criteria of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. RESULTS: Of 3424 articles on potentially modifiable risk factors for dementia, 1719 met our inclusion criteria; 60 were deemed to be of good or fair quality. Of 1721 articles on genetic risk factors, 62 that met our inclusion criteria were deemed to be of good or fair quality. On the basis of evidence from these articles, we made recommendations for the risk assessment and primary prevention of Alzheimer disease. For the primary prevention of Alzheimer's disease, there is good evidence for controlling vascular risk factors, especially hypertension (grade A), and weak or insufficient evidence for manipulation of lifestyle factors and prescribing of medications (grade C). There is good evidence to avoid estrogens and high-dose (> 400 IU/d) of vitamin E for this purpose (grade E). Genetic counselling and testing may be offered to at-risk individuals with an apparent autosomal dominant inheritance (grade B). Screening for the apolipoprotein E genotype in asymptomatic individuals in the general population is not recommended (grade E). INTERPRETATION: Despite the personal and societal burden of dementia, our understanding of genetic predisposition to dementias and the contribution of other risk factors remains limited. More importantly, there are few data to explain the overall risks and benefits of prevention strategies or their impact of risk modification.

Holiday waistline. Time to consensus: the effect of the stomach on consensus decision-making at large conferences.

INTRODUCTION: The factors affecting decision-making at consensus conferences are not well understood. This paper studies the complex association between time to consensus (TTC) and the timing and quality of food, as well as the self-reported level of frustration (PITA factor) with the question at hand. METHODS: We came, we saw, we ate. RESULTS: There was an association between the TTC and the time to eating, especially lunch. There was a trend to faster TTC the better the researchers rated the food. The speed of decision-making was also increased when the PITA score was high, especially late in the day. INTERPRETATION: Organizers of large consensus conferences need to be aware of these factors in decision-making and should try to use them to get more controversial items voted to their satisfaction.