The digital mobile assessment of cognition as a quick comprehensive cognitive test for primary care

The increased pressure on primary care makes it important for other health care providers, such as community pharmacists, to collaborate with general practitioners in activities related to chronic disease care. Therefore, the objective of the present project was to develop a protocol of action that allows close pharmacist-physician collaboration to carry out a coordinated action for very early detection of cognitive impairment (CI).Methods: A comparative study to promote early detection of CI was conducted in 19 community pharmacies divided into two groups: one group with interprofessional collaboration (IPC) and one group without interprofessional collaboration (NonIPC). IPC was defined as an interactive procedure involving all pharmacists, general practitioners and neurologists. A total of 281 subjects with subjective memory complaints were recruited. Three tests were used in the community pharmacies to detect possible CI: Memory Impairment Screening, Short Portable Mental State Questionnaire, and Semantic Verbal Fluency. Individuals with at least one positive cognitive test compatible with CI, were referred to primary care, and when appropriate, to the neurology service. Finally, we evaluated the differences in clinical and diagnostic follow-up in both groups after six months.Results: The NonIPC study group included 38 subjects compatible with CI referred to primary care (27.54%). Ten were further referred to a neurology department (7.25%) and four of them (2.90%) obtained a confirmed clinical diagnosis of CI. In contrast, in the IPC group, 46 subjects (32.17%) showed results compatible with CI and were referred to primary care. Of these, 21 (14.68%) were subsequently referred to a neurology service, while the remaining 25 were followed up by primary care. Nineteen individuals out of those referred to a neurology service obtained a confirmed clinical diagnosis of CI (13.29%). The percentage of subjects in the NonIPC group referred to neurology and the percentage of subjects diagnosed with CI, was significantly lower in comparison to the IPC group (p-value = 0.0233; p-value = 0.0007, respectively).Conclusions: The creation of IPC teams involving community pharmacists, general practitioners, and neurologists allow for increased detection of patients with CI or undiagnosed dementia and facilitates their clinical follow-up. This opens the possibility of diagnosis in patients in the very early stages of dementia, which can have positive implications to improve the prognosis and delay the evolution of the disease.

Download Full-text

Multidimensional Geriatric Assessment with MAGIC Questionnaire and Quality of Life in Elderly Primary Care Patients

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ◽

10.3390/ijerph17197089 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 17 (19) ◽

pp. 7089

Author(s):

Fátima Dios-Quiroga ◽

Susana Soliño-Lourido ◽

Carmen Pallas-Queijo ◽

Clara González-Formoso ◽

Aurelia Constenla-Castro ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Primary Care ◽

Geriatric Assessment ◽

Linear Regression Analysis ◽

Cognitive Test ◽

Outcome Variable ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Family Doctors ◽

The Impact

The Manageable Geriatric Assessment (MAGIC) questionnaire, recently developed by a group of European family doctors for multidimensional geriatric assessment in primary care, has not yet been evaluated in clinical practice. The objectives of this study were to translate and adapt it to Spanish and to check the association between the limitations of older adults identified by this questionnaire and their perceived health status assessed by the five-level version of the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D-5L). First, questionnaire translation, back translation and cognitive test were applied. Then, a cross-sectional observational study was performed in two Spanish health centers Galicia, Spain. Participants were 170 people aged over 75, recruited opportunistically by consecutive case sampling. Anonymous surveys were used to collect data. The MAGIC questionnaire, the EQ-5D-5L scale, age and sex were employed. The visual analog scale of EQ-5D-5L (EQ VAS) was used as the outcome variable. Descriptive and bivariate analyses by sex and outcome variable are presented. The linear regression analysis showed an association with quality of life for daily activities, recognizing people and stress incontinence. As this is associated with quality of life, the MAGIC questionnaire may be useful in primary care and a study to investigate the impact on health with a clinical trial would be worth considering.

Download Full-text

Screening for Dementia in Primary Care: A Comparison of the GPCOG and the MMSE

Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders ◽

10.1159/000450992 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 42 (5-6) ◽

pp. 323-330 ◽

Cited By ~ 22

Author(s):

Henry Brodaty ◽

Michael H. Connors ◽

Clement Loy ◽

Armando Teixeira-Pinto ◽

Nigel Stocks ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

General Practitioner ◽

Mental Disorders ◽

Mini Mental State Examination ◽

Screening Tool ◽

The Elderly ◽

Cognitive Test ◽

Effective Screening ◽

State Examination ◽

Higher Sensitivity

Background/Aims: The General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition (GPCOG) is a brief cognitive test. This study compared the GPCOG to the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the most widely used test, in terms of their ability to detect likely dementia in primary care. Methods: General practitioners across three states in Australia recruited 2,028 elderly patients from the community. A research nurse administered the GPCOG and the MMSE, as well as the Cambridge Examination for Mental Disorders of the Elderly Cognitive Scale-Revised that we used to define likely dementia. Results: Overall, the GPCOG and the MMSE were similarly effective at detecting likely dementia. The GPCOG, however, had a higher sensitivity than the MMSE when using published cutpoints. Conclusion: The GPCOG is an effective screening tool for dementia in primary care. It appears to be a viable alternative to the MMSE, whilst also requiring less time to administer.

Download Full-text

Fool’s Gold: Psychologists Using Disingenuous Reasoning to Mislead Legislatures into Granting Psychologists Prescriptive Authority

American Journal of Law & Medicine ◽

10.1017/s0098858800002586 ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 29 (4) ◽

pp. 489-524

Author(s):

Brent Pollitt

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Mental Illness ◽

Nurse Practitioners ◽

Primary Care Physicians ◽

American Psychological Association ◽

The United States ◽

Psychotropic Medications ◽

American Psychological ◽

Training Requirements ◽

Prescriptive Authority

Mental illness is a serious problem in the United States. Based on “current epidemiological estimates, at least one in five people has a diagnosable mental disorder during the course of a year.” Fortunately, many of these disorders respond positively to psychotropic medications. While psychiatrists write some of the prescriptions for psychotropic medications, primary care physicians write more of them. State legislatures, seeking to expand patient access to pharmacological treatment, granted physician assistants and nurse practitioners prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications. Over the past decade other groups have gained some form of prescriptive authority. Currently, psychologists comprise the primary group seeking prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications.The American Society for the Advancement of Pharmacotherapy (“ASAP”), a division of the American Psychological Association (“APA”), spearheads the drive for psychologists to gain prescriptive authority. The American Psychological Association offers five main reasons why legislatures should grant psychologists this privilege: 1) psychologists’ education and clinical training better qualify them to diagnose and treat mental illness in comparison with primary care physicians; 2) the Department of Defense Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project (“PDP”) demonstrated non-physician psychologists can prescribe psychotropic medications safely; 3) the recommended post-doctoral training requirements adequately prepare psychologists to prescribe safely psychotropic medications; 4) this privilege will increase availability of mental healthcare services, especially in rural areas; and 5) this privilege will result in an overall reduction in medical expenses, because patients will visit only one healthcare provider instead of two–one for psychotherapy and one for medication.

Download Full-text