Objective: We investigated motivations of patients and care partners for their memory clinic visit, and whether these are expressed in consultations.Methods: We included data from 115 patients (age... Show moreObjective: We investigated motivations of patients and care partners for their memory clinic visit, and whether these are expressed in consultations.Methods: We included data from 115 patients (age 71 +/- 11, 49% Female) and their care partners (N = 93), who completed questionnaires after their first consultation with a clinician. Audio-recordings of these consultations were available from 105 patients. Motivations for visiting the clinic were content-coded as reported by patients in the questionnaire, and expressed by patients and care partners in consultations.Results: Most patients reported seeking a cause for symptoms (61%) or to confirm/exclude a (dementia) diagnosis (16%), yet 19% reported another motivation: (more) information, care access, or treatment/advice. In the first consultation, about half of patients (52%) and care partners (62%) did not express their motivation(s). When both expressed a motivation, these differed in about half of dyads. A quarter of patients (23%) expressed a different/complementary motivation in the consultation, then reported in the questionnaire.Conclusion: Motivations for visiting a memory clinic can be specific and multifaceted, yet are often not addressed during consultations. Practice implications: We should encourage clinicians, patients, and care partners to talk about motivations for visiting the memory clinic, as a starting point to personalize (diagnostic) care. Show less
BackgroundDuring the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic older patients had an increased risk of hospitalisation and death. Reports on the association of frailty with poor outcome have been... Show moreBackgroundDuring the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic older patients had an increased risk of hospitalisation and death. Reports on the association of frailty with poor outcome have been conflicting.ObjectiveThe aim of the present study was to investigate the independent association between frailty and in-hospital mortality in older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands.MethodsThis was a multi-centre retrospective cohort study in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands, including all patients aged ≥70 years, who were hospitalised with clinically confirmed COVID-19 between February and May 2020. Data were collected on demographics, co-morbidity, disease severity and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.ResultsA total of 1,376 patients were included (median age 78 years (IQR 74-84), 60% male). In total, 499 (38%) patients died during hospital admission. Parameters indicating presence of frailty (CFS 6-9) were associated with more co-morbidities, shorter symptom duration upon presentation (median 4 vs. 7 days), lower oxygen demand and lower levels of CRP. In multivariable analyses, the CFS was independently associated with in-hospital mortality: compared to patients with CFS 1-3, patients with CFS 4-5 had a two times higher risk (odds ratio (OR) 2.0 (95%CI 1.3-3.0) and patients with CFS 6-9 had a three times higher risk of in-hospital mortality (OR 2.8 (95%CI 1.8-4.3)).ConclusionsThe in-hospital mortality of older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands was 38%. Frailty was independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality, even though COVID-19 patients with frailty presented earlier to the hospital with less severe symptoms. Show less
Visser, L.N.C.; Pelt, S.A.R.; Kunneman, M.; Bouwman, F.H.; Claus, J.J.; Kalisvaart, K.J.; ... ; Hillen, M.A. 2019
Background The development of novel diagnostics enables increasingly earlier diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Timely diagnosis may benefit patients by reducing their uncertainty regarding the... Show moreBackground The development of novel diagnostics enables increasingly earlier diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Timely diagnosis may benefit patients by reducing their uncertainty regarding the cause of symptoms, yet does not always provide patients with the desired certainty. Objective To examine, using both quantitative and qualitative methods, uncertainty communicated by memory clinic clinicians in post-diagnostic testing consultations with patients and their caregivers. Methods First, we identified all uncertainty expressions of 22 clinicians in audiotaped post-diagnostic testing consultations with 78 patients. Second, we statistically explored relationships between patient/clinician characteristics and uncertainty expressions. Third, the transcribed uncertainty expressions were qualitatively analysed, determining the topic to which they pertained, their source and initiator/elicitor (clinicians/patients/caregivers). Results Within 57/78 (73%) consultations, clinicians expressed in total 115 uncertainties, of which 37% elicited by the patient or caregiver. No apparent relationships were found between patient/clinician characteristics and whether or not, and how often clinicians expressed uncertainty. Uncertainty expressions pertained to ten different topics, most frequently patient's diagnosis and symptom progression. Expressed uncertainty was mostly related to the unpredictability of the future and limits to available knowledge. Discussion and conclusions The majority of clinicians openly discussed the limits of scientific knowledge and diagnostic testing with patients and caregivers in the dementia context. Noticeably, clinicians did not discuss uncertainty in about one quarter of consultations. More evidence is needed on the beneficial and/or harmful effects on patients of discussing uncertainty with them. This knowledge can be used to support clinicians to optimally convey uncertainty and facilitate patients' uncertainty management. Show less
