No abstract

BackgroundAdults and older people with intellectual disabilities (ID) frequently receive anti-cholinergic drugs in chronic use, but no studies in Italy to date have investigated cumulative anticholinergic exposure and factors associated with high anticholinergic burden in this frail population.AimTo probe the cumulative exposure to anticholinergics and the demographic, social and clinical factors associated with high exposure.MethodsThe 2012 updated version of the Anticholinergic Burden Score (ACB) was calculated for a multicentre sample of 276 adult and older people over 40 years with ID and associations with factors assessed.ResultsOverall, antipsychotics, antiepileptics, anxiolytics, and antidepressants were the most frequent classes contributing to the total ACB score. People living in residential care were more likely exposed to high anticholinergic burden (an ACB score of 3+): both community housing (odds ratio [OR] 4.63, 95%CI 1.08–19.95) and nursing home facility ([OR] 9.99, 95%CI 2.32–43.04). There was also a significant association between an ACB score of 3+ and reporting mental health conditions ([OR] 25.56, 95% CI 8.08–80.89) or a neurological disease ([OR] 4.14, 95%CI 1.32–12.94). Neither demographic characteristics (age and gender) nor other clinical conditions (somatic comorbidity, levels and typology of ID) were associated with higher anticholinergic load. A high burden of anticholinergic was significantly more frequent in laxative users (22.6% ACB3+ vs. 5.1% ACB 0) (p = 0.003).ConclusionsPsychotropic drugs were the highest contributors to the anticholinergic burden in adult and old age ID, especially in those people living in institutional settings with mental health and/or neurological conditions. High anticholinergic load has shown to be associated with the use of laxatives.

Aim: To determine the applicability and psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Disability Assessment of Dementia scale (DAD-I) in a community-residing population with early-stage Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Methods: The DAD-I was administered to the primary caregivers of 159 patients (mean age ± SD 77.1 ± 5.2) with mild AD (mean Mini Mental State Examination, MMSE, ± SD 23.1 ± 2.2). Results: The DAD-I showed excellent internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.92) and good construct validity. The DAD-I score was not significantly associated with gender, education and presumed duration of the illness, and had a low negative correlation with age. The DAD-I score correlated moderately with the traditional Instrumental Activities of Daily Living and Activities of Daily Living scales, respectively, with r = 0.53 and r = 0.54 (p < 0.0001). Relatively low, but statistically significant correlations (r ranging between 0.21 and 0.31) with the MMSE were also found. Conclusion: The DAD-I was found to be a reliable and valid instrument to assess functional disability in community-dwelling Italian subjects with early-stage AD.

These results confirm the reliability and validity of AFAST-I and emphasise the complexity of the relationship among functional status, cognitive functioning and behaviour also in adults/seniors with ID.

The present study confirms the cross-cultural value of DSQIID which was proved to be a psychometrically valid and user-friendly observer-rated scale for dementia screening in adults with both DS and non-DS ID.