American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry最新文献

In this paper, we describe our process of changing language of the National Institute on Aging Imbedded Pragmatic Alzheimer's disease and AD-related dementias Clinical Trials Collaboratory (NIA IMPACT Collaboratory) "Stakeholder Engagement Team" to "Engaging Partners Team" in response to feedback from community partners regarding the problematic connotations of the term "stakeholder." We present a brief history of the term "stakeholder" and its use in clinical and community-engaged research. Then, we summarize critiques of this term, including its colonial history and potential to reinforce complacency with generational traumas, particularly among Indigenous peoples and communities. We conclude with a detailed overview of our team and organization's multi-step process to discontinue use of the term "stakeholder," in alignment with a theoretical model of organizational behavior change. This paper highlights the importance of critically evaluating language and responding to community partners. We hope our process can guide other researchers and organizations.

Background: The association between delirium and dementia has been suggested, but mostly in the postoperative setting. This study aims to explore this relationship in a broader inpatient population, leveraging extensive real-world data to provide a more generalized understanding.

Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, electronic health records of 11,970,475 hospitalized patients aged over 60 from nine institutions in South Korea were analyzed. Patients with and without delirium were identified, and propensity score matching (PSM) was used to create comparable groups. A 10-year longitudinal analysis was conducted using the Cox proportional hazards model, which calculated the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Additionally, a meta-analysis was performed, aggregating results from all nine medical institutions. Lastly, we conducted various subgroup and sensitivity analyses to demonstrate the consistency of our study results across diverse conditions.

Results: After 1:1 PSM, a total of 47,306 patients were matched in both the delirium and nondelirium groups. Both groups had a median age group of 75-79 years, with 43.1% being female. The delirium group showed a significantly higher risk of all dementia compared with the nondelirium group (HR: 2.70 [95% CI: 2.27-3.20]). The incidence risk for different types of dementia was also notably higher in the delirium group (all dementia or mild cognitive impairment, HR: 2.46 [95% CI: 2.10-2.88]; Alzheimer's disease, HR: 2.74 [95% CI: 2.40-3.13]; vascular dementia, HR: 2.55 [95% CI: 2.07-3.13]). This pattern was consistent across all subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions: Delirium significantly increases the risk of onset for all types of dementia. These findings highlight the importance of early detection of delirium and prompt intervention. Further research studies are warranted to investigate the mechanisms linking delirium and dementia.

Objectives: Cognitive frailty refers to the co-occurrence of cognitive impairment and frailty without concurrent Alzheimer's disease or dementia. Studies of cognitive frailty and mortality have been limited to single country or older people. However, frailty and cognitive decline may occur much earlier. We aimed to examine the association between different cognitive frailty status and subsequent all-cause mortality among middle-aged and older people in 17 countries.

Methods: Participants aged 50 and over were drawn from six prospective cohorts of aging. We classified participants according to their cognitive impairment and frailty status into the following groups: none, only cognitive impairment, only frailty and cognitive frailty. Competing-risks regression models were used to evaluate the association of different cognitive frailty status at baseline with subsequent all-cause mortality.

Results: The cognitive frailty group had a higher mortality risk compared to those without cognitive impairment and frailty groups. Meta-analysis results showed participants with cognitive frailty (pooled subhazard ratio [SHR] = 2.34, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.01-2.72, I² = 68.0%) had a higher mortality risk compared with those with only cognitive impairment status (pooled SHR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.25-1.48, I² = 3.0%) or only frailty status (pooled SHR = 1.83, 95% CI: 1.72-1.95, I² = 31.0%). The association between cognitive frailty and mortality were stronger among those who were aged 70 years and older, males, single and nonconsumers of alcohol.

Conclusions: Cognitive frailty, frailty or cognitive impairment alone, is associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality in Asian, European and American countries. Physical and cognitive function screening should be conducted as early as possible in middle-aged and older people, and targeted intervention approaches should be developed to reduce the incidence of adverse health outcomes.