% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Eichler:139697,
author = {Eichler, Tilly and Thyrian, Jochen Rene and Hertel,
Johannes and Richter, Steffen and Michalowsky, Bernhard and
Wucherer, Diana and Dreier, Adina and Kilimann, Ingo and
Teipel, Stefan and Hoffmann, Wolfgang},
title = {{P}atient {V}ariables {A}ssociated with the {A}ssignment of
a {F}ormal {D}ementia {D}iagnosis to {P}ositively {S}creened
{P}rimary {C}are {P}atients.},
journal = {Current Alzheimer research},
volume = {15},
number = {1},
issn = {1567-2050},
address = {Hilversum},
publisher = {Bentham Science Publ. Ltd.},
reportid = {DZNE-2020-06019},
pages = {44-50},
year = {2018},
abstract = {Main objective was to analyze the associations of patient
variables (depression, quality of life, anti-dementia drug
treatment, knowledge about dementia) with the assignment of
a formal diagnosis of dementia to community-dwelling primary
care patients who have screened positive for
dementia.DelpHi-MV (Dementia: life- and person-centered help
in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania) is a general practitioner
based randomized controlled intervention trial. Present
analyses are based on cross-sectional data of 319 positively
screened patients (age 70+, living at home) who had not been
formally diagnosed with dementia before the screening. The
medical diagnoses (ICD-10) were retrieved from the patient's
medical records. Depression (Geriatric Depression Scale;
GDS), quality of life in Alzheimer's disease (Qol-AD),
knowledge about dementia, and anti-dementia drug treatment
were assessed after the screening test at the baseline
examination.At the baseline examination, 171 out of 319
patients $(54\%)$ had been formally diagnosed with dementia
after they have screened positive. Univariate comparisons
showed no statistically significant differences between
diagnosed and undiagnosed patients regarding depression
(GDS≥6: $11\%$ vs. $15\%;$ p=0.396), quality of life (mean
(SD): 2.8 (0.3) vs. 2.8 (0.4); p=0.833), and the knowledge
about dementia $(75\%$ vs. $75\%;$ p>0.999). Patients who
had received a formal diagnosis were more often treated with
anti-dementia drugs $(20\%$ vs. $11\%;$ p=0.040).
Multivariate analyses controlled for confounding variables
confirmed these findings.Present findings do not support
concerns that the assignment of a formal dementia diagnosis
after screening is associated with potential harms. If
confirmed in a prospective study, our data would suggest
that patients may benefit from being formally diagnosed
regarding anti-dementia drug treatment.},
keywords = {Aged / Aged, 80 and over / Cross-Sectional Studies /
Dementia: diagnosis / Dementia: drug therapy / Dementia:
epidemiology / Dementia: psychology / Depression:
epidemiology / Female / Health Knowledge, Attitudes,
Practice / Humans / Male / Nootropic Agents: therapeutic use
/ Primary Health Care / Quality of Life / Nootropic Agents
(NLM Chemicals)},
cin = {AG Thyrian / AG Grabe / Magdeburg Pre 2020 / Translational
Health Care Research / Clinical Dementia Research Rostock
/Greifswald ; AG Teipel},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-2719)1510800 / I:(DE-2719)5000001 /
I:(DE-2719)6000015 / I:(DE-2719)1510600 /
I:(DE-2719)1510100},
pnm = {344 - Clinical and Health Care Research (POF3-344)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-344},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:28891445},
doi = {10.2174/1567205014666170908095707},
url = {https://pub.dzne.de/record/139697},
}