Mini-Cog for the detection of dementia within a primary care setting.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia are becoming increasingly common with the aging of most populations. The majority of individuals with dementia will first present for care and assessment in primary care settings. There is a need for brief dementia screening instruments that can accurately detect dementia in primary care settings. The Mini-Cog is a brief, cognitive screening test that is frequently used to evaluate cognition in older adults in various settings. OBJECTIVES: To determine the accuracy of the Mini-Cog for detecting dementia in a primary care setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDLINE, Embase and four other databases, initially to September 2012. Since then, four updates to the search were performed using the same search methods, and the most recent was January 2017. We used citation tracking (using the databases' 'related articles' feature, where available) as an additional search method and contacted authors of eligible studies for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We only included studies that evaluated the Mini-Cog as an index test for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia or related forms of dementia when compared to a reference standard using validated criteria for dementia. We only included studies that were conducted in primary care populations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted and described information on the characteristics of the study participants and study setting. Using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) criteria we evaluated the quality of studies, and we assessed risk of bias and applicability of each study for each domain in QUADAS-2. Two review authors independently extracted information on the true positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives and entered the data into Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5). We then used RevMan 5 to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals. We summarized the sensitivity and specificity of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies in forest plots and also plotted them in a receiver operating characteristic plot. We also created a 'Risk of bias' and applicability concerns graph to summarize information related to the quality of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: There were a total of four studies that met our inclusion criteria, including a total of 1517 total participants. The sensitivity of the Mini-Cog varied between 0.76 to 1.00 in studies while the specificity varied between 0.27 to 0.85. The included studies displayed significant heterogeneity in both methodologies and clinical populations, which did not allow for a meta-analysis to be completed. Only one study (Holsinger 2012) was found to be at low risk of bias on all methodological domains. The results of this study reported that the sensitivity of the Mini-Cog was 0.76 and the specificity was 0.73. We found the quality of all other included studies to be low due to a high risk of bias with methodological limitations primarily in their selection of participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a limited number of studies evaluating the accuracy of the Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of dementia in primary care settings. Given the small number of studies, the wide range in estimates of the accuracy of the Mini-Cog, and methodological limitations identified in most of the studies, at the present time there is insufficient evidence to recommend that the Mini-Cog be used as a screening test for dementia in primary care. Further studies are required to determine the accuracy of Mini-Cog in primary care and whether this tool has sufficient diagnostic test accuracy to be useful as a screening test in this setting.

Opioid prescription practices for patients discharged from the emergency department with acute musculoskeletal fractures.

BACKGROUND: Opioid related mortality rate has increased 200% over the past decade. Studies show variable emergency department (ED) opioid prescription practices and a correlation with increased long-term use. ED physicians may be contributing to this problem. Our objective was to analyze ED opioid prescription practices for patients with acute fractures. METHODS: We conducted a review of ED patients seen at two campuses of a tertiary care hospital. We evaluated a consecutive sample of patients with acute fractures (January 2016-April 2016) seen by ED physicians. Patients admitted or discharged by consultant services were excluded. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients discharged with an opioid prescription. Data were collected using screening lists, electronic records, and interobserver agreement. We calculated simple descriptive statistics and a multivariable analysis. RESULTS: We enrolled 816 patients, including 441 females (54.0%). Most common fracture was wrist/hand (35.2%). 260 patients (31.8%) were discharged with an opioid; hydromorphone (N = 115, range 1-120 mg) was most common. 35 patients (4.3%) had pain related ED visits <1 month after discharge. Fractures of the lumbar spine (OR 10.78 [95% CI: 3.15-36.90]) and rib(s)/sternum/thoracic spine (OR 5.46 [95% CI: 2.88-10.35)] had a significantly higher likelihood of opioid prescriptions. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients presenting to the ED with acute fractures were not discharged with an opioid. Hydromorphone was the most common opioid prescribed, with large variations in total dosage. Overall, there were few return to ED visits. We recommend standardization of ED opioid prescribing, with attention to limiting total dosage.

Meta-Analysis of the Prevalence of Major Depressive Disorder Among Older Adults With Dementia.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the overall prevalence of major depressive disorder (MDD) in persons with dementia (ie, "depression in dementia": DpD). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the prevalence and factors associated with DpD among older adults (age range 58.7-87.8 years). The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO registry (2015:CRD42015020681). DATA SOURCES: We searched the following electronic databases: MEDLINE (1946-February 2017), Embase (1980-2017 week 5), and PsycINFO (1967-February 2017) using medical subject headings and free-text search terms for studies in the English language. STUDY SELECTION: We screened 9,421 studies, and 55 met the inclusion criteria (ie, used validated criteria for both MDD and dementia). DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers extracted data from included studies. Meta-analysis was used to determine the pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals for the prevalence of DpD. Prevalence across dementia subtypes, study setting, diagnostic criteria, and dementia severity was compared in subgroup analyses. RESULTS: The prevalence of MDD in all-cause dementia was 15.9% (95% CI, 12.6%-20.1%). The prevalence of MDD was higher among individuals with vascular dementia (24.7%) compared to Alzheimer's disease (14.8%). Studies using the provisional diagnostic criteria for DpD reported a higher prevalence (35.6%) compared to studies using either the DSM-III-R (13.2%) or DSM-IV (17.3%) criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Depression is common among individuals with dementia, and the type of dementia and diagnostic criteria affect prevalence estimates of DpD. Further studies are required to understand factors that lead to the development of DpD and strategies to prevent and treat DpD.

Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias within a primary care setting.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia are becoming increasingly common with the aging of most populations. The majority of individuals with dementia will first present for care and assessment in primary care settings. There is a need for brief dementia screening instruments that can accurately diagnose dementia in primary care settings. The Mini-Cog is a brief, cognitive screening test that is frequently used to evaluate cognition in older adults in various settings. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog for diagnosing Alzheimer's disease dementia and related dementias in a primary care setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, MEDLINE, Embase and four other databases, initially to September 2012. Since then, four updates to the search were performed using the same search methods, and the most recent was January 2017. We used citation tracking (using the databases' 'related articles' feature, where available) as an additional search method and contacted authors of eligible studies for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We only included studies that evaluated the Mini-Cog as an index test for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia or related forms of dementia when compared to a reference standard using validated criteria for dementia. We only included studies that were conducted in primary care populations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted and described information on the characteristics of the study participants and study setting. Using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) criteria we evaluated the quality of studies, and we assessed risk of bias and applicability of each study for each domain in QUADAS-2. Two review authors independently extracted information on the true positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives and entered the data into Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5). We then used RevMan 5 to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals. We summarized the sensitivity and specificity of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies in forest plots and also plotted them in a receiver operating characteristic plot. We also created a 'Risk of bias' and applicability concerns graph to summarize information related to the quality of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: There were a total of four studies that met our inclusion criteria, including a total of 1517 total participants. The sensitivity of the Mini-Cog varied between 0.76 to 1.00 in studies while the specificity varied between 0.27 to 0.85. The included studies displayed significant heterogeneity in both methodologies and clinical populations, which did not allow for a meta-analysis to be completed. Only one study (Holsinger 2012) was found to be at low risk of bias on all methodological domains. The results of this study reported that the sensitivity of the Mini-Cog was 0.76 and the specificity was 0.73. We found the quality of all other included studies to be low due to a high risk of bias with methodological limitations primarily in their selection of participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a limited number of studies evaluating the accuracy of the Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of dementia in primary care settings. Given the small number of studies, the wide range in estimates of the accuracy of the Mini-Cog, and methodological limitations identified in most of the studies, at the present time there is insufficient evidence to recommend that the Mini-Cog be used as a screening test for dementia in primary care. Further studies are required to determine the accuracy of Mini-Cog in primary care and whether this tool has sufficient diagnostic test accuracy to be useful as a screening test in this setting.