Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Garnier-Crussard, Antoinea; b; 1; * | Vernaudon, Julienb; 1; * | Auguste, Nicolasc | Moutet, Claireb | Dauphinot, Virginieb | Krolak-Salmon, Pierrea; b; d
Affiliations: [a] Claude Bernard University Lyon 1, France | [b] Clinical and Research Memory Center of Lyon, Lyon Institute For Elderly, Charpennes Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, France | [c] Clinical and Research Memory Center of Saint-Etienne, France | [d] French Federation of Memory Centers, France
Correspondence: [*] Correspondence to: Antoine Garnier-Crussard and Julien Vernaudon, Hôpital des Charpennes, 27 rue Gabriel Péri, 69100 Villeurbanne, France. Tel.: +33 472432324; E-mail: antoine.garnier-crussard@chu-lyon.fr (Antoine Garnier-Crussard).
Note: [1] These authors contributed equally to this work.
Abstract: Background:Neurocognitive disorders (NCD) are underdiagnosed in primary care, mainly because of the misunderstanding of benefits associated with timely diagnosis. Objective:The aim of this study was to explore the benefits and risks of diagnosis in a population of general practitioners (GPs), specialized physicians (SPs), other healthcare professionals (HPs), and informal caregivers (ICs). Methods:A questionnaire was submitted to GPs, SPs, HPs. and ICs. It aimed at evaluating benefits and risks related to NCD diagnosis associated with four prototypical clinical cases at different stages: isolated cognitive complaint/mild NCD, major NCD at mild/moderate stage, moderate stage with behavioral and psychotic symptoms, and severe stage. The concepts of early, timely, and personalized diagnosis were evaluated. Results:A total of 719 completed surveys were collected from 183 GPs, 176 SPs, 281 HPs, and 79 ICs. More than 90% of the participants considered initiating a diagnosis as relevant except at the severe stage. Benefits were superior to risks for all groups and all four cases alike (p < 0.001). Benefits were lower according to GPs and higher for SPs than the other groups at the first two stages (p < 0.001). At the moderate stage, there were few differences between groups. At the severe stage, GPs and SPs claimed it was less relevant to carry out a diagnosis than the other groups (p < 0.001). Risks were higher for ICs and lower for SPs (p < 0.001). The best diagnosis concept was the personalized diagnosis. Conclusion:Benefits appeared more relevant than risks with differences according to the stage of the disease and type of respondents.
Keywords: Dementia, diagnosis, ethical issues, neurocognitive disorders, survey
DOI: 10.3233/JAD-180403
Journal: Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 1267-1275, 2019
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
sales@iospress.com
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
info@iospress.nl
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office info@iospress.nl
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
china@iospress.cn
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: editorial@iospress.nl