3.8 Article

The Lost Years: Delay Between the Onset of Cognitive Symptoms and Clinical Assessment at a Memory Clinic

Journal

CANADIAN GERIATRICS JOURNAL
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages 152-156

Publisher

MULTIMED INC
DOI: 10.5770/cgj.21.297

Keywords

memory clinic; symptom duration; referral; dementia; mild cognitive impairment

Funding

  1. Fondation de l'Institut de geriatrie de Montreal
  2. Council of Physicians, Dentists and Pharmacists of the Institut universitaire de geriatrie de Montreal

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Early assessment of cognitive symptoms is an issue in geriatrics. This study investigated the delay from the onset of cognitive symptoms to initial clinical assessment and its associations with patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Methods This is a cross-sectional retrospective study using medical chart review of 316 patients referred for assessment to a university-affiliated memory clinic. Symptom duration was self-reported by patients/carers. Severity of symptoms assessed by the MoCA and FAST instruments was compared according to delay duration (>= 3 years vs. <3 years) using chi-squared tests. Logistic regression was used to determine the association between patients' characteristics and long symptom duration (>= 3 years). Results At the initial assessment, 29.4% of patients reported experiencing cognitive symptoms for >= 3 years. They were more likely to have MoCA scores <= 17 (47.8 vs. 34.1%; p=.023) and FAST scores >= 5 (21.5 vs. 10.8%; p=.012). They were also significantly older than 75 years (75-84 yr: OR=2.22 [95% CI: 1.11-4.41]; >= 85 yr: 4.36 [2.08-9.11]), presented more depressive symptoms (2.37 [1.40-4.02]), and were less likely to live alone (0.55 [0.31-0.96]). Conclusions A significant proportion of patients had cognitive symptoms for years when initially assessed, which delayed diagnosis and management. Stigma, depression, and compensatory help from carers may contribute to this delay.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available