Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Organisational aspects and assessment practices of Australian memory clinics: an Australian Dementia Network (ADNeT) Survey

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          Conducting a national survey of clinicians and administrators from specialised dementia assessment services (memory clinics) in Australia to examine their current organisational aspects and assessment procedures and inform clinical tool harmonisation as part of the Australian Dementia Network—memory clinics project.

          Design

          A cross-sectional survey.

          Setting

          Public and private memory clinics across Australia.

          Participants

          150 individual clinicians completed the survey between May and August 2019. Responses could be given anonymously. Most clinics were publicly funded services (83.2%) and in metropolitan regions (70.9%).

          Outcome measures

          Descriptive data on organisational aspects of memory clinics (eg, waiting times, staffing); the three most commonly used assessment tools per assessment type (eg, self-report) and cognitive domain (eg, attention).

          Results

          Since the last national survey in 2009, the number of memory clinics across Australia has increased substantially but considerable variability has remained with respect to funding structure, staffing and assessment procedures. The average clinic employed 2.4 effective full-time staff (range 0.14–14.0). The reported waiting time for an initial assessment ranged from 1 week to 12 months with a median of 7 weeks. While most clinics (97%) offered follow-up assessments for their clients, only a few (31%) offered any form of cognitive intervention. We identified over 100 different cognitive assessment tools that were used at least ‘sometimes’, with widespread use of well-established core screening tools and a subset of common neuropsychological tests.

          Conclusion

          This paper presents a current snapshot of Australian memory clinics, showing considerable heterogeneity with some common core elements. These results will inform the development of national memory clinic guidelines. Furthermore, our data make a valuable contribution to the international comparison of clinical practice standards and advocate for greater harmonisation to ensure high-quality dementia care.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Missed and delayed diagnosis of dementia in primary care: prevalence and contributing factors.

          Dementia is a growing public health problem for which early detection may be beneficial. Currently, the diagnosis of dementia in primary care is dependent mostly on clinical suspicion on the basis of patient symptoms or caregivers' concerns and is prone to be missed or delayed. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to ascertain the prevalence and contributing factors for missed and delayed dementia diagnoses in primary care. Prevalence of missed and delayed diagnosis was estimated by abstracting quantitative data from studies of diagnostic sensitivity among primary care providers. Possible predictors and contributory factors were determined from the text of quantitative and qualitative studies of patient, caregiver, provider, and system-related barriers. Overall estimates of diagnostic sensitivity varied among studies and seemed to be in part a function of dementia severity, degree of patient impairment, dementia subtype, and frequency of patient-provider contact. Major contributory factors included problems with attitudes and patient-provider communication, educational deficits, and system resource constraints. The true prevalence of missed and delayed diagnoses of dementia is unknown but seems to be high. Until the case for dementia screening becomes more compelling, efforts to promote timely detection should focus on removing barriers to diagnosis.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) database: the Uniform Data Set.

            The National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) is responsible for developing and maintaining a database of participant information collected from the 29 Alzheimer's Disease Centers (ADCs) funded by the National Institute on Aging (NIA). The NIA appointed the ADC Clinical Task Force to determine and define an expanded, standardized clinical data set, called the Uniform Data Set (UDS). The goal of the UDS is to provide ADC researchers a standard set of assessment procedures, collected longitudinally, to better characterize ADC participants with mild Alzheimer disease and mild cognitive impairment in comparison with nondemented controls. NACC implemented the UDS (September 2005) by developing data collection forms for initial and follow-up visits based on Clinical Task Force definitions, a relational database, and a data submission system accessible by all ADCs. The NIA requires ADCs to submit UDS data to NACC for all their Clinical Core participants. Thus, the NACC web site (https://www.alz.washington.edu) was enhanced to provide efficient and secure access data submission and retrieval systems.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Uniform Data Set (UDS): clinical and cognitive variables and descriptive data from Alzheimer Disease Centers.

              A Clinical Task Force, composed of clinical leaders from Alzheimer's Disease Centers (ADC), was convened by the National Institute on Aging to develop a uniform set of assessment procedures to characterize individuals with mild Alzheimer disease and mild cognitive impairment in comparison with nondemented aging. The resulting Uniform Data Set (UDS) defines a common set of clinical observations to be collected longitudinally on ADC participants in accordance with standard methods. The UDS was implemented at all ADCs on September 1, 2005. Data obtained with the UDS are submitted to the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center and represent a unique and valuable source of data to support and stimulate collaborative research.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2021
                9 February 2021
                : 11
                : 2
                : e038624
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentCentre for Healthy Brain Ageing (CHeBA), School of Psychiatry , University of New South Wales Faculty of Medicine , Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [2 ]departmentSchool of Psychology, Charles Perkins Centre and the Brain & Mind Centre , The University of Sydney , Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [3 ]departmentCentre for Healthy Brain Ageing (CHeBA), School of Psychiatry , University of New South Wales , Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [4 ]departmentNeuropsychiatric Institute , Prince of Wales Hospital and Community Health Services , Randwick, New South Wales, Australia
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Inga Mehrani; i.mehrani@ 123456unsw.edu.au
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4169-3494
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8630-6398
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9595-3220
                Article
                bmjopen-2020-038624
                10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038624
                7875292
                33563617
                9f7bcdfb-3f11-4a4e-9a8d-e833f813e402
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 19 March 2020
                : 14 November 2020
                : 29 November 2020
                Categories
                Diagnostics
                1506
                1689
                Original research
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                geriatric medicine,dementia,quality in health care
                Medicine
                geriatric medicine, dementia, quality in health care

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content52

                Cited by11

                Most referenced authors226