利用美国健康与退休研究数据库估算痴呆症/阿尔茨海默氏症的患病率

Amir Abbas Tahami Monfared, N. Hummel, A. Chandak, A. Khachatryan, R. Zhang, Q. Zhang
{"title":"利用美国健康与退休研究数据库估算痴呆症/阿尔茨海默氏症的患病率","authors":"Amir Abbas Tahami Monfared, N. Hummel, A. Chandak, A. Khachatryan, R. Zhang, Q. Zhang","doi":"10.14283/jpad.2024.114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Background</h3><p>Updated prevalence estimates along the continuum of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) can foster a more nuanced and effective approach to managing AD within the current healthcare landscape.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objectives</h3><p>This study aims to estimate the prevalence and severity distribution of dementia/AD (including mild, moderate, and severe stages) and all-cause mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in the United States using data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Design</h3><p>Retrospective study.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Setting</h3><p>Data from the bi-annual HRS surveys involving in-depth interviews of a representative sample of Americans aged &gt;50 years.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Participants</h3><p>Dementia/AD and all-cause MCI patients from the 4 most recent HRS surveys (2014, 2016, 2018 and 2020).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Measurements</h3><p>AD was identified based on diagnosis (self-report). Cognitive performance (modified Telephone Interview of Cognitive Status [TICS-m]) scores in the dementia/AD range were also captured; all-cause MCI was similarly identified using the TICS-m. Dementia/AD and MCI prevalence, as well as the distribution by dementia/AD stage (mild, moderate, or severe), were estimated. Sampling weights developed by HRS were applied to ensure the sample’s representativeness of the target population and unbiased estimates for population parameters.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Across the four HRS surveys, the total number of HRS respondents ranged from 15,000 to 21,000 (unweighted); 7,000 to 14,000 had TICS-m scores. The estimated prevalence of AD (all severity categories combined) in the 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020 HRS surveys was 1.2%, 1.2%, 1.3% and 1.0%, respectively using the diagnosis-based approach; using the cognitive performance-based approach, 23–27% patients had scores in the dementia/AD ranges across the 4 surveys. The estimated prevalence of all-cause MCI was consistently 23% in each survey. In the 2020 survey, the distribution of mild, moderate, and severe disease stages was 34%, 45%, and 21%, respectively, in patients self-reporting an AD diagnosis, and 55%, 40%, and 5%, respectively in all patients meeting TICS-m threshold for dementia/AD.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>The prevalence of AD diagnosis based on self-report was approximately 1% across the 4 most recent HRS surveys and may reflect the proportion of patients who have actively sought healthcare for AD. Among HRS survey respondents with cognitive scores available, over 20% were in the dementia/AD range. The distribution of disease by stage differed for self-reported AD diagnosis vs dementia/AD based on cognitive scores. Discordance in estimates of dementia/AD and stage distributions underscores a need for better understanding of clinical practice patterns in AD diagnosis, use of clinical assessment tools, and severity classification in the United States. Accurate patient identification is needed, especially early in the AD disease continuum, to allow for timely and appropriate initiation of new anti-amyloid treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":22711,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prevalence Estimation of Dementia/Alzheimer’s Disease Using Health and Retirement Study Database in the United States\",\"authors\":\"Amir Abbas Tahami Monfared, N. Hummel, A. Chandak, A. Khachatryan, R. Zhang, Q. Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.14283/jpad.2024.114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Background</h3><p>Updated prevalence estimates along the continuum of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) can foster a more nuanced and effective approach to managing AD within the current healthcare landscape.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Objectives</h3><p>This study aims to estimate the prevalence and severity distribution of dementia/AD (including mild, moderate, and severe stages) and all-cause mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in the United States using data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS).</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Design</h3><p>Retrospective study.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Setting</h3><p>Data from the bi-annual HRS surveys involving in-depth interviews of a representative sample of Americans aged &gt;50 years.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Participants</h3><p>Dementia/AD and all-cause MCI patients from the 4 most recent HRS surveys (2014, 2016, 2018 and 2020).</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Measurements</h3><p>AD was identified based on diagnosis (self-report). Cognitive performance (modified Telephone Interview of Cognitive Status [TICS-m]) scores in the dementia/AD range were also captured; all-cause MCI was similarly identified using the TICS-m. Dementia/AD and MCI prevalence, as well as the distribution by dementia/AD stage (mild, moderate, or severe), were estimated. Sampling weights developed by HRS were applied to ensure the sample’s representativeness of the target population and unbiased estimates for population parameters.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>Across the four HRS surveys, the total number of HRS respondents ranged from 15,000 to 21,000 (unweighted); 7,000 to 14,000 had TICS-m scores. The estimated prevalence of AD (all severity categories combined) in the 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020 HRS surveys was 1.2%, 1.2%, 1.3% and 1.0%, respectively using the diagnosis-based approach; using the cognitive performance-based approach, 23–27% patients had scores in the dementia/AD ranges across the 4 surveys. The estimated prevalence of all-cause MCI was consistently 23% in each survey. In the 2020 survey, the distribution of mild, moderate, and severe disease stages was 34%, 45%, and 21%, respectively, in patients self-reporting an AD diagnosis, and 55%, 40%, and 5%, respectively in all patients meeting TICS-m threshold for dementia/AD.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Conclusion</h3><p>The prevalence of AD diagnosis based on self-report was approximately 1% across the 4 most recent HRS surveys and may reflect the proportion of patients who have actively sought healthcare for AD. Among HRS survey respondents with cognitive scores available, over 20% were in the dementia/AD range. The distribution of disease by stage differed for self-reported AD diagnosis vs dementia/AD based on cognitive scores. Discordance in estimates of dementia/AD and stage distributions underscores a need for better understanding of clinical practice patterns in AD diagnosis, use of clinical assessment tools, and severity classification in the United States. Accurate patient identification is needed, especially early in the AD disease continuum, to allow for timely and appropriate initiation of new anti-amyloid treatments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22711,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14283/jpad.2024.114\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14283/jpad.2024.114","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景最新的阿尔茨海默病(AD)患病率估计值可以促进在当前的医疗保健环境中采取更加细致有效的方法来管理阿尔茨海默病。目标本研究旨在利用健康与退休研究(HRS)的数据估计美国痴呆症/AD(包括轻度、中度和重度阶段)和全因轻度认知障碍(MCI)的患病率和严重程度分布。设计回顾性研究.设置数据来自一年两次的健康与退休研究调查,其中包括对具有代表性的 50 岁美国人样本进行的深度访谈.参与者来自最近 4 次健康与退休研究调查(2014、2016、2018 和 2020 年)中的痴呆/AD 和全因 MCI 患者.测量根据诊断(自我报告)确定痴呆/AD。痴呆/AD范围内的认知表现(改良的认知状态电话访谈[TICS-m])得分也被记录下来;全因MCI同样通过TICS-m来确定。对痴呆/AD 和 MCI 患病率以及痴呆/AD 阶段(轻度、中度或重度)的分布情况进行了估算。结果在四次 HRS 调查中,HRS 受访者总人数从 15,000 到 21,000 不等(未加权);7,000 到 14,000 人有 TICS-m 评分。采用基于诊断的方法,2014、2016、2018 和 2020 年 HRS 调查中,AD(合并所有严重程度类别)的估计患病率分别为 1.2%、1.2%、1.3% 和 1.0%;采用基于认知表现的方法,4 次调查中有 23-27% 的患者得分在痴呆/AD 范围内。在每次调查中,全因 MCI 的估计患病率始终为 23%。在 2020 年的调查中,自我报告 AD 诊断的患者中,轻度、中度和重度疾病分期的分布比例分别为 34%、45% 和 21%,而在所有达到 TICS-m 痴呆/AD 临界值的患者中,轻度、中度和重度疾病分期的分布比例分别为 55%、40% 和 5%。在有认知评分的 HRS 调查对象中,超过 20% 属于痴呆症/注意力缺失症范围。自我报告的注意力缺失症诊断与基于认知评分的痴呆症/注意力缺失症的疾病阶段分布不同。痴呆/AD和分期分布估计值的不一致突出表明,需要更好地了解美国在诊断AD、使用临床评估工具和严重程度分类方面的临床实践模式。需要对患者进行准确的识别,尤其是在AD疾病的早期,以便及时、适当地开始新的抗淀粉样蛋白治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Prevalence Estimation of Dementia/Alzheimer’s Disease Using Health and Retirement Study Database in the United States

Background

Updated prevalence estimates along the continuum of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) can foster a more nuanced and effective approach to managing AD within the current healthcare landscape.

Objectives

This study aims to estimate the prevalence and severity distribution of dementia/AD (including mild, moderate, and severe stages) and all-cause mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in the United States using data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS).

Design

Retrospective study.

Setting

Data from the bi-annual HRS surveys involving in-depth interviews of a representative sample of Americans aged >50 years.

Participants

Dementia/AD and all-cause MCI patients from the 4 most recent HRS surveys (2014, 2016, 2018 and 2020).

Measurements

AD was identified based on diagnosis (self-report). Cognitive performance (modified Telephone Interview of Cognitive Status [TICS-m]) scores in the dementia/AD range were also captured; all-cause MCI was similarly identified using the TICS-m. Dementia/AD and MCI prevalence, as well as the distribution by dementia/AD stage (mild, moderate, or severe), were estimated. Sampling weights developed by HRS were applied to ensure the sample’s representativeness of the target population and unbiased estimates for population parameters.

Results

Across the four HRS surveys, the total number of HRS respondents ranged from 15,000 to 21,000 (unweighted); 7,000 to 14,000 had TICS-m scores. The estimated prevalence of AD (all severity categories combined) in the 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020 HRS surveys was 1.2%, 1.2%, 1.3% and 1.0%, respectively using the diagnosis-based approach; using the cognitive performance-based approach, 23–27% patients had scores in the dementia/AD ranges across the 4 surveys. The estimated prevalence of all-cause MCI was consistently 23% in each survey. In the 2020 survey, the distribution of mild, moderate, and severe disease stages was 34%, 45%, and 21%, respectively, in patients self-reporting an AD diagnosis, and 55%, 40%, and 5%, respectively in all patients meeting TICS-m threshold for dementia/AD.

Conclusion

The prevalence of AD diagnosis based on self-report was approximately 1% across the 4 most recent HRS surveys and may reflect the proportion of patients who have actively sought healthcare for AD. Among HRS survey respondents with cognitive scores available, over 20% were in the dementia/AD range. The distribution of disease by stage differed for self-reported AD diagnosis vs dementia/AD based on cognitive scores. Discordance in estimates of dementia/AD and stage distributions underscores a need for better understanding of clinical practice patterns in AD diagnosis, use of clinical assessment tools, and severity classification in the United States. Accurate patient identification is needed, especially early in the AD disease continuum, to allow for timely and appropriate initiation of new anti-amyloid treatments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease
The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The JPAD Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’Disease will publish reviews, original research articles and short reports to improve our knowledge in the field of Alzheimer prevention including: neurosciences, biomarkers, imaging, epidemiology, public health, physical cognitive exercise, nutrition, risk and protective factors, drug development, trials design, and heath economic outcomes.JPAD will publish also the meeting abstracts from Clinical Trial on Alzheimer Disease (CTAD) and will be distributed both in paper and online version worldwide.We hope that JPAD with your contribution will play a role in the development of Alzheimer prevention.
期刊最新文献
Association between Cognitive Reserve Indicator and Chronic Disease-Free Survival: A Large Community-Based Longitudinal Study Phase 1 Studies of the Anti-Tau Monoclonal Antibody JNJ-63733657 in Healthy Participants and Participants with Alzheimer’s Disease Roles of TREM2 in the Pathological Mechanism and the Therapeutic Strategies of Alzheimer’s Disease Development and Validation the Mobile Toolbox (MTB) Spelling Test Correlates of Subjective Cognitive Decline in Black American Men
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1