Age and ageing最新文献

Background: There is growing interest in the comorbidity of vascular and neurodegenerative pathologies in patients with cerebrovascular disease (CVD) beyond cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA). However, the relationship between amyloid-β and vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) remains debated.

Objective: To investigate the association between VCI and amyloid-β deposition in non-CAA CVD patients.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO and CENTRAL databases were systematically searched. Observational studies, including case-control and cohort studies, associating cognitive scores with amyloid load measured by positron emission tomography were selected. Meta-analyses were performed to assess the strength of amyloid-cognition associations across CVD subtypes and cognitive domains. A random-effects model using the inverse variance method was used, with heterogeneity evaluated by Q-statistics and I2 statistics. Meta-regression analyses were conducted to examine the influence of moderators, and publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger's test. All statistical analyses were performed using StataMP 18.

Results: Twenty-seven eligible studies encompassing 2894 participants were included. Among non-CAA CVD patients, global cognitive performance was significantly lower in those with higher amyloid-β deposition (standardized mean difference = -0.43, P < 0.001). The correlation strength varied across cognitive domains (executive function: r = -0.41; language: r = -0.36; memory: r = -0.29; all P < 0.001). The correlation was significant in patients with subcortical vascular disease (r = -0.43, P < 0.001) but not post-stroke patients (r = -0.19, P > 0.05).

Conclusions: Amyloid-β load is associated with cognitive decline in non-CAA CVD patients. This is more pronounced in patients with subcortical vascular disease than in post-stroke patients. Executive function is the most susceptible domain in VCI when the level of amyloid-β increases.

Background: Concerns about falling (CaF) are common in older people and can lead to avoidance of activities, social isolation and reduced physical function. However, there is limited knowledge about CaF in people with osteoarthritis (OA); yet, symptoms may increase CaF. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of CaF and associated factors in people with knee or hip OA.

Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from the Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark registry including patients with OA treated in primary care. CaF was assessed with the Short Falls Efficacy Scale International (Short FES-I, range 7-28, low to high). Associations between CaF and pain, function and psychological factors were evaluated using multivariable linear Tobit regression.

Results: In total, 7442 patients were included [mean age 67 years (SD: 9.6), 67% females]. Mean Short FES-I was 9.8 [95% confidence interval (CI): 9.7; 9.8]. Moderate CaF was observed in 48.1% (95% CI: 46.7; 48.9) of participants, whilst 11.3% (95% CI: 10.7; 12.1) had a high level of CaF. CaF was more prevalent in the oldest participants and in females. Pain intensity [β-value (95% CI): 0.52 (0.48; 0.55)], chair stand test [-0.21 (-0.22; -0.19)] and fear of movement [1.38 (1.19; 1.56)] were significantly associated with increased CaF across age groups and sex.

Conclusions: CaF is common in people with OA, especially in the oldest participants and in females. Higher pain, lower function and psychological distress are associated with CaF; yet, the causality of the associations remain to be determined. Integrating CaF assessments and interventions into OA management in primary care seems highly relevant.

Background: Trials of interventions to prevent or treat delirium in older adults resident in long-term care settings (LTC) report heterogenous outcomes, hampering the identification of effective management strategies for this important condition. Our objective was to develop international consensus among key stakeholders for a core outcome set (COS) for future trials of interventions to prevent and/or treat delirium in this population.

Methods: We used a rigorous COS development process including qualitative interviews with family members and staff with experience of delirium in LTC; a modified two-round Delphi survey; and virtual consensus meetings using nominal group technique. The study was registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative (https://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/796).

Results: Item generation identified 22 delirium-specific outcomes and 32 other outcomes from 18 qualitative interviews. When combined with outcomes identified in our earlier systematic review, and following an item reduction step, this gave 43 outcomes that advanced to the formal consensus processes. These involved 169 participants from 12 countries, and included healthcare professionals (121, 72%), researchers (24, 14%), and family members/people with experience of delirium (24, 14%). Six outcomes were identified as essential to include in all trials of interventions for delirium in LTC, and were therefore included in the COS. These are: 'delirium occurrence'; 'delirium related distress'; 'delirium severity'; 'cognition including memory', 'admission to hospital' and 'mortality'.

Conclusions: This COS, endorsed by the American Delirium Society and the European and Australasian Delirium Associations, is recommended for use in future clinical trials evaluating delirium prevention or treatment interventions for older adults residing in LTC.