4.2 Article

Treatment of a whole population sample of Alzheimer's disease with donepezil over a 4-year period: Lessons learned

Journal

DEMENTIA AND GERIATRIC COGNITIVE DISORDERS
Volume 25, Issue 3, Pages 226-231

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000114450

Keywords

dementia; Alzheimer's disease; acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil); memory clinic; outcomes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: In the UK it is recommended that acetylcholinesterase inhibitors be restricted to patients with moderate Alzheimer's disease, and progress monitored within specialist clinics. Objective: To describe a cohort of patients with Alzheimer's disease from a whole city population treated with donepezil, and to analyse outcomes over 4 years. Methods: Historical cohort design: 88 patients recruited 1997 1998, assessed at baseline with 4-year follow-up, using an agreed protocol and validated measures: survival, retention in treatment, cognition, non-cognitive symptoms, weight change, carer stress. Results: 64.7% remained on treatment beyond 6 months, 57.9% beyond 1 year and 12.5% beyond 4 years. 56% remained alive at 4 years-almost twice the number predicted. Mean MMSE score amongst patients in treatment did not deteriorate over 4 years. Survival, retention in treatment, maintenance/improvement of cognition was greater with high baseline MMSE. Non-cognitive symptoms, carer stress and weight change remained low throughout. Conclusions: A minority of people with dementia from the population (88 of potential 2,000 at outset, 11 by 4 years) received treatment. Benefits for individuals were confirmed, especially for those with mild impairment. Expenditure on medication was modest in a population context. These findings question recent guidance from the National Institute for Clinical Excellence, which would restrict therapy to patients with moderate cognitive impairment. Copyright (c) 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available