Outcomes measures in a decade of dementia and mild cognitive impairment trials

Abstract

BackgroundIn a research study, to give a comprehensive evaluation of the impact of interventions, the outcome measures should reflect the lived experience of the condition. In dementia studies, this necessitates the use of outcome measures which capture the range of disease effects, not limited to cognitive functioning. In particular, assessing the functional impact of cognitive impairment is recommended by regulatory authorities, but there is no consensus on the optimal approach for outcome assessment in dementia research. Our aim was to describe the outcome measures used in dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) intervention studies, with particular interest in those evaluating patient-centred outcomes of functional performance and quality of life.MethodsWe performed a focused review of the literature with multiple embedded checks of internal and external validity. We used the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group’s register of dementia studies, ALOIS. ALOIS was searched to obtain records of all registered dementia and MCI intervention studies over a 10-year period (2004–2014). We included both published and unpublished materials. Outcomes were categorised as cognitive, functional, quality of life, mood, behaviour, global/disease severity and institutionalisation.ResultsFrom an initial return of 3271 records, we included a total of 805 records, including 676 dementia trial records and 129 MCI trial records. Of these, 78 % (630) originated from peer-reviewed publications and 60 % (487) reported results of pharmacological interventions. Cognitive outcomes were reported in 70 % (563), in contrast with 29 % (237) reporting measures of functional performance and only 13 % (102) reporting quality of life measures. We identified significant heterogeneity in the tools used to capture these outcomes, with frequent use of non-standardised tests.ConclusionsThis focus on cognitive performance questions the extent to which intervention studies for dementia are evaluating outcome measures which are relevant to individual patients and their carers. The heterogeneity in measures, use of bespoke tools and poor descriptions of test strategy all support the need for a more standardised approach to the conduct and reporting of outcomes assessments.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13195-016-0216-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cognition-Oriented Treatments for Older Adults: a Systematic Overview of Systematic Reviews

“…Moreover, although several reviews reported meta-analytic results for subjective cognition, psychosocial and functional outcomes, the pooled effect estimates were generally based on a small number of primary trials and, within these broad categories, a diverse set of outcomes and instruments had been employed. The fact that clinically relevant outcomes are assessed infrequently and with heterogeneous measures has previously been highlighted (Harrison, Noel-Storr, Demeyere, Reynish, & Quinn, 2016;Lees, Fearon, Harrison, Broomfield, & Quinn, 2012) and attempts have been made to increase harmonisation (Webster et al, 2017), which seems imperative in order to improve synthesis efforts in the field of cognition-oriented treatments.…”

What matters to people with memory problems, healthy volunteers and health and social care professionals in the context of developing treatment to prevent Alzheimer's dementia? A qualitative study

“…Work is underway to establish a core outcome set for evaluating non‐pharmacological interventions for people living at home with dementia . In the context of the development of pharmaceutical interventions, it is widely argued that better testing of clinical meaningfulness and the lived experience of individual patients is essential in AD clinical trials …”

“…The first challenge in drug development in AD is that there is no consensus on the optimal approach for outcome assessment in dementia research, particularly within the preventative paradigm at the earlier stage of the disease course. A literature review by the authors concluded there are currently no validated PROMs used in the AD clinical trials for the early (pre‐clinical) stage of AD.…”

Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the mild cognitive impairment questionnaire

“…Although HRQoL is one of the main measures used to evaluate health outcomes and several questionnaires are available for assessing HRQoL in people with dementia at different stages of disease progression, very few instruments designed specifically to appraise people with MCI are available (Bowling et al, 2015; Dichter, Schwab, Meyer, Bartholomeyczik, & Halek, 2016; Yang, Dawes, Leroi, & Gannon, 2018). In general, the instruments used to assess HRQoL or other patient‐reported health outcomes require the respondent to demonstrate adequate cognitive performance (Harrison, Noel‐Storr, Demeyere, Reynish, & Quinn, 2016). In many cases, these instruments are long and very complex (e.g., in terms of the number of response alternatives provided), which makes them difficult to use for people with MCI.…”