RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Dementia prevalence is increasing, with no cure at present. Drug therapies have potential side effects and risk of mortality. People with dementia are frequently offered non-pharmacological interventions to improve quality of life and relieve symptoms. Identifying which interventions are cost-effective is important due to finite resources in healthcare services. AIMS: The aims were to review published economic evaluations of community and nursing home non-pharmacological interventions for people with mild cognitive impairment or dementia and assess the usefulness of these evaluations for decision making in health services, for use by policy and local and national decision makers. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42021252999) of economic evaluations of non-pharmacological interventions for dementia or mild cognitive impairment with a narrative approach to data synthesis. EXCLUSIONS: interventions for dementia prevention/early detection/end of life care. Databases searched: Academic Search Premier, MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection, PsycArticles, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Business Source Premier and Regional Business News; timeframe 1 January 2011-11 May 2023. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). RESULTS: The review included 37 economic evaluations and four reviews worldwide across several distinct forms of care: physical activity, cognition, training, multicomponent, assistive technology and other (specialist dementia care, group living, home care vs care home). The intervention with the strongest evidence of cost-effectiveness was maintenance cognitive stimulation therapy. Case management, occupational therapy and dementia care management also showed good evidence of cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSION: More economic evidence on the cost-effectiveness of specific dementia care interventions is needed, with consistency of methods and outcome measures. This could improve local and national decision makers' confidence to promote future cost-effective dementia interventions.
RESUMO
Abnormal reward processing is a hallmark of neurodegenerative diseases, most strikingly in frontotemporal dementia. However, the phenotypic repertoire and neuroanatomical substrates of abnormal reward behaviour in these diseases remain incompletely characterized and poorly understood. Here we addressed these issues in a large, intensively phenotyped patient cohort representing all major syndromes of sporadic frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease. We studied 27 patients with behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia, 58 with primary progressive aphasia (22 semantic variant, 24 non-fluent/agrammatic variant and 12 logopenic) and 34 with typical amnestic Alzheimer's disease, in relation to 42 healthy older individuals. Changes in behavioural responsiveness were assessed for canonical primary rewards (appetite, sweet tooth, sexual activity) and non-primary rewards (music, religion, art, colours), using a semi-structured survey completed by patients' primary caregivers. Changes in more general socio-emotional behaviours were also recorded. We applied multiple correspondence analysis and k-means clustering to map relationships between hedonic domains and extract core factors defining aberrant hedonic phenotypes. Neuroanatomical associations were assessed using voxel-based morphometry of brain MRI images across the combined patient cohort. Altered (increased and/or decreased) reward responsiveness was exhibited by most patients in the behavioural and semantic variants of frontotemporal dementia and around two-thirds of patients in other dementia groups, significantly (P < 0.05) more frequently than in healthy controls. While food-directed changes were most prevalent across the patient cohort, behavioural changes directed toward non-primary rewards occurred significantly more frequently (P < 0.05) in the behavioural and semantic variants of frontotemporal dementia than in other patient groups. Hedonic behavioural changes across the patient cohort were underpinned by two principal factors: a 'gating' factor determining the emergence of altered reward behaviour and a 'modulatory' factor determining how that behaviour is directed. These factors were expressed jointly in a set of four core, trans-diagnostic and multimodal hedonic phenotypes: 'reward-seeking', 'reward-restricted', 'eating-predominant' and 'control-like'-variably represented across the cohort and associated with more pervasive socio-emotional behavioural abnormalities. The principal gating factor was associated (P < 0.05 after correction for multiple voxel-wise comparisons over the whole brain) with a common profile of grey matter atrophy in anterior cingulate, bilateral temporal poles, right middle frontal and fusiform gyri: the cortical circuitry that mediates behavioural salience and semantic and affective appraisal of sensory stimuli. Our findings define a multi-domain phenotypic architecture for aberrant reward behaviours in major dementias, with novel implications for the neurobiological understanding and clinical management of these diseases.
RESUMO
Background: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is effective in treating depression; however, the effect on physical activity, sleep and recovery is unclear. This study investigated rTMS effect on physical activity and sleep through providing patients with a Fitbit and software apps; and reports the impact of rTMS on depression, anxiety and mental health recovery. Methods: Study design was a pre and post data collection without a control, with twenty-four participants with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Measures used were Fitbit activity and sleep data, and patient-rated Recovering Quality of Life (ReQoL-20), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7). Results: Response and remission rates were, respectively: 34.8% and 39% for PHQ-9; 34.8% and 47.8% for GAD-7. ReQoL-20 response and reliable improvement were 29.4% and 53%. PHQ-9, GAD-7 and ReQol-20 scores significantly improved, with large effect sizes. Analysis of Fitbit activity and sleep data yielded non-significant results. The Fitbit data machine learning model classified two levels of depression to 82% accuracy. Limitations: rTMS treatment was open-label and adjunct to existing antidepressant medication. No control group. Female patients were overrepresented. Conclusions: Improvements on the ReQoL-20 and aspects of sleep and activity indicate the positive impact of rTMS on the individual's real world functioning and quality of life. A wearable activity tracker can provide feedback to patients and clinicians on sleep, physical activity and depression levels. Further research could be undertaken through a sufficiently powered RCT comparing rTMS versus rTMS with use of a Fitbit, its software applications, and sleep and physical activity advice.
