AzTrials
AzTrials

DementiaGEMSNCT00289471

Identifying Patients With Dementia in Primary Care

An observational study of Dementia and Memory Disorders, run by US Department of Veterans Affairs at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Veterans who completed GEMS-Phase 1 will be asked to participate in GEMS-Phase 2 to determine the accuracy of methods used to assess mild memory problems. This will better help us evaluate the screening test completed in GEMS-Phase 1. The goals are: 1. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 65 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Dementia, Memory Disorders
How many people
630 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
Oct 2009to Oct 2010
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 65 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Older adult

Study population: Veterans' who have previously completed GEMS-Phase 1 testing, continues to be a VA clinic patient and identifies a key family member or friend who will answer questions about the veteran's memory and daily activities.

Who may be able to join

  • Previous participant who completed GEMS-Phase 1
  • Continues to be a VA clinic patient
  • Identifies a key informant with phone

Who cannot join

  • Severe hearing or visual impairment
  • Acute medical condition

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • Durham VA Medical Center HSR&D COE

    Durham, North Carolina, 27705

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Dementia in Primary Care: Setting the Stage for Quality Improvement

Veterans who completed GEMS-Phase 1 will be asked to participate in GEMS-Phase 2 to determine the accuracy of methods used to assess mild memory problems. This will better help us evaluate the screening test completed in GEMS-Phase 1. The goals are:

  1. Compare the assessment of memory made at the initial visit to assessments of memory made at the second evaluation.
  2. Determine of veterans with mild memory problems have improvement or worsening of these memory problems over time. Our long-term goal remains to optimize the quality of care for veterans with cognitive impairment. We will also determine if patient characteristics can be used to target case-finding, describe the current process of care and evaluate the association between cognitive impairment and overall- and dementia-related health care utilization and costs.
Read the detailed description

Dementia has high public health significance due to its prevalence, adverse impact on patients and caregivers, high economic cost to society and the rapidly expanding numbers of individuals age 65 and older. As the largest provider of geriatric care in the U.S., dementia is particularly relevant to the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). However, only a small proportion of patients with dementia are diagnosed early when treatments are most effective and the opportunity for careful life planning remains, in part because of the absence of feasible, well-validated case-finding instruments. Our long-term objective is to improve the care and outcomes of veterans with clinically significant cognitive impairment. The first steps towards realizing this objective are to determine the acceptability of cognitive screening to patients and to identify feasible, valid case-finding tools for primary care. We will also determine if patient characteristics can be used to target case-finding, describe the current process of care and evaluate the association between cognitive impairment and overall- and dementia-related health care utilization and costs. Our research team, located in the Center for Health Services Research in Primary Care, brings together researchers uniquely suited to achieving this objective. Specific Aims1.Primary Aim: To determine if cognitive screening is acceptable to patients, and whether brief cognitive screeners perform as well as the longer Modified Mini-Mental Status Exam (3MS) for dementia and cognitive impairment-not dementia (CIND).Primary Hypothesis 1: Higher perceived risk of dementia, higher perceived benefits and fewer perceived harms from screening will be positively associated with screening acceptance. Primary Hypotheses 2: Compared to the 3MS, the Mini-Cog, Memory Impairment Screen and 2-item functional screen will have similar performance characteristics. 2.Secondary Aim 1: To determine if sociodemographic and clinical characteristics available in the electronic medical record can be used to target individuals for cognitive screening and improve screening accuracy. Hypothesis: The combination of sociodemographic characteristics/clinical information and screening results will more accurately discriminate between demented and non-demented patients than screening results alone.3.Secondary Aim 2: To describe current care for an inception cohort with dementia or cognitive impairment-not dementia. Hypothesis: Compared to patients with dementia, patients with cognitive impairment-not dementia will undergo less diagnostic testing, be less likely to complete an advanced directive and be less likely to receive dementia specific medications. 4.Exploratory Aim: To evaluate the association between cognitive impairment and overall- and dementia-related health care utilization and costs. Exploratory Hypothesis: Controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and medical comorbidity, overall healthcare utilization and costs will increase as cognitive impairment increases. In phase 1, a random sample of primary care patients age 65 years will be recruited from 3 primary care clinics to complete the Modified Dementia Screening Acceptance and Perceived Harms Questionnaire. In phase 2, patients will complete three brief instruments and the standard 15-item 3MS that will be compared to a criterion standard interview for dementia. We project 140-200 patients will have dementia, 200-300 CIND, and approximately 600 will be cognitively normal. Instruments will be compared using sensitivity/specificity, likelihood ratios and receiver operating characteristic curves. The emotional impact of screening will be assessed following screening. Clinical and sociodemographic characteristics available in the Computerized Patient Record System, together with cognitive screening results, will be analyzed with logistic regression models to identify risk factors that may be used to target individuals for cognitive screening and/or improve screening accuracy. Care patterns for patients with dementia and CIND will be described based on detailed chart abstractions. For the exploratory analysis on cognitive impairment and utilization, two-part utilization models will be estimated for each utilization type, outpatient clinic visits, inpatient visits, pharmacy utilization, and other utilization types; utilization data will be obtained from administrative data.

Being tested
No intervention delivered.
Keywords
Sensitivity and specificity, Physician's practice patterns, Health Care costs, Quality of Health Care
Medical subject headings
Dementia, Memory Disorders, Hypersensitivity

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • No intervention delivered.Other

    No intervention delivered.

Study groups in NCT00289471
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Cognitive ScreeningCognitive screening
Receives: Other: No intervention delivered.

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Performance Characteristics

    Sensitivity and Specificity for Modified Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE), a measure scored 0-100 to assess cognitive impairment

    Measured: Cross-sectional [at baseline; no longitudinal component]

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted9 Feb 2006 (estimated)
  2. Study startOct 2009
  3. Primary completionDec 2009
  4. Study completionOct 2010

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Time perspective
Cross-sectional
Enrolment
630 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00289471
Sponsor's protocol ID
IIR 05-112
Acronym
GEMS
Status last verified
Apr 2015
First submitted
8 Feb 2006
Last updated
1 May 2015
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Plassman BL, Williams JW Jr, Burke JR, Holsinger T, Benjamin S. Systematic review: factors associated with risk for and possible prevention of cognitive decline in later life. Ann Intern Med. 2010 Aug 3;153(3):182-93. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-153-3-201008030-00258. Epub 2010 Jun 14.

    PubMed 20547887
  • Holsinger T, Plassman BL, Stechuchak KM, Burke JR, Coffman CJ, Williams JW Jr. Screening for cognitive impairment: comparing the performance of four instruments in primary care. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012 Jun;60(6):1027-36. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.03967.x. Epub 2012 May 30.

    PubMed 22646750

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Dementia and Memory Disorders, run by US Department of Veterans Affairs at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 1 May 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 26 Aug 2014). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Performance Characteristics (time frame: Cross-sectional [at baseline; no longitudinal component]). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00289471, which also lists 2 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 1 May 2015.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in