Patient- and Caregiver-Related Factors Associated with Caregiver Assessed Global Deterioration Scale Scoring in Demented Patients

Abstract

Background Informant-based rating scales are widely used in dementia but patients' and caregivers' features influence the final scoring. We aimed to evaluate the role of patient- and caregiver-related factors in a caregiver rated Global Deterioration Scale (GDS) score in a sample of Greek patients with dementia. Methods We included 194 patients with dementia and 194 caregivers/family relatives; Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE); Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI); Katz Index of Activities of Daily Living (K-IADL) were administered to (a) patients and Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CES-D) Scale; Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) to (b) caregivers. Participants' demographics and patients' and caregivers' characteristics were entered into a 3-block regression analysis. Results The final model explained 55% of the total variance of the caregiver assessed GDS score. The following variables significantly contributed to the final model: MMSE (β=-0.524); K-IADL (β=-0.264); ZBI (β=0.145). Conclusion We herein confirm the contribution of patients' cognitive and functional status and caregivers' burden in caregiver rated GDS scoring irrespective of demographic-related characteristics.

Face‐to‐face versus telephone‐based cognitive‐behavioral therapy for family caregivers of people with dementia

“…This finding could indicate that it is particularly difficult for family caregivers of PwD with more deteriorated cognitive functions to participate in F2F sessions, presumably because it is harder for them to leave the care recipient alone or organize appropriate alternative supervision for the PwD. The global deterioration of PwD has repeatedly been shown to be associated with increased caregiver burden (e.g., Kang et al, 2014; Mougias et al, 2018). In the present study, global deterioration was also significantly related to increased caregiver burden ( r s = 0.23, p < 0.001) and depression ( r s = 0.14, p = 0.015) as well as lower emotional well‐being ( r s = −0.12, p = 0.032) and QoL of caregivers ( r s = −0.180 to −0.12, p < 0.05).…”

Prevalence and Clinical Correlation of Decayed, Missing, and Filled Teeth in Elderly Inpatients With Schizophrenia

“…Several cross-sectional studies demonstrated that DMFT relates to tooth loss and cognition ( 17 , 18 , 28 ). In addition, the nursing group used GDSRANK to assess neurodegeneration of the patients ( 23 ), and the results indicated that MT remained associated with GDSRANK score after controlling for age and smoking, whereas DMFT was not. Few studies used GDSRANK as a cognitive scale, but cross-sectional studies identified a weak association between cognitive impairment and MT ( 41 ).…”

“…We counted the unanswerable as incorrect answers ( 22 ). GDSRANK assesses dementia severity over seven grades ( 23 ): absence of cognitive changes (first grade), very mild cognitive decline (second grade), mild cognitive decline (third grade), moderate cognitive decline (fourth grade), moderately severe cognitive decline (fifth grade), severe cognitive decline (sixth grade), and very severe cognitive decline (seventh grade). The score was derived from the interview of patients and caregivers.…”

Impact of clinical symptoms and diagnosis: The electronic Person‐Specific Outcome Measure (ePSOM) development programme

“…Even though the AD trials are moving to an earlier disease stage, there is still a suggestion to involve a study partner even in the case of pre-dementia studies [27]. This is despite evidence that accuracy and amount of information provided by study partners may vary [28,29] and the study partner's executive skills may influence the accuracy of subjectively reported ADLs [30] as well as perceived burden on reporting in global assessment scales [31]. Incorporating the individual's own view of well-being is important as there are suggestions individuals in the asymptomatic pre-dementia stages of the AD continuum do experience decline from their own baseline and the combination of biomarker assessments with subjective assessments of subtle change may be useful in this group [32].…”