A large body of epidemiological and experimental data exploring the relationship between physical activity (PA) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) are now available. Despite observational evidence supporting a role for PA in delaying the onset of AD, randomised controlled trials have reported mixed findings, likely due to the heterogeneity in study cohorts, outcome measures, and the adopted PA intervention. The primary objective of this narrative review is to evaluate the extant evidence on the relationship between PA, cognitive decline and AD in older populations. The interaction between PA and the putative mechanisms underlying AD progression, including genetic factors and amyloid-β levels will be explored. In this context, particular attention will be given to studies assessing PA in the early clinical and preclinical, asymptomatic stages of AD. Based on current evidence, clinical considerations for implementation of exercise-based interventions are discussed, along with limitations of previous research and directions for future studies.

Some studies have linked bilingualism with a later onset of dementia, Alzheimer's disease (AD), and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Not all studies have observed such relationships, however. Differences in study outcomes may be due to methodological limitations and the presence of confounding factors within studies such as immigration status and level of education. We conducted the first systematic review with meta-analysis combining cross-sectional studies to explore if bilingualism might delay symptom onset and diagnosis of dementia, AD, and MCI. Primary outcomes included the age of symptom onset, the age at diagnosis of MCI or dementia, and the risk of developing MCI or dementia. A secondary outcome included the degree of disease severity at dementia diagnosis. There was no difference in the age of MCI diagnosis between monolinguals and bilinguals [mean difference: 3.2; 95% confidence intervals (CI): −3.4, 9.7]. Bilinguals vs. monolinguals reported experiencing AD symptoms 4.7 years (95% CI: 3.3, 6.1) later. Bilinguals vs. monolinguals were diagnosed with dementia 3.3 years (95% CI: 1.7, 4.9) later. Here, 95% prediction intervals showed a large dispersion of effect sizes (−1.9 to 8.5). We investigated this dispersion with a subgroup meta-analysis comparing studies that had recruited participants with dementia to studies that had recruited participants with AD on the age of dementia and AD diagnosis between mono-and bilinguals. Results showed that bilinguals vs. monolinguals were 1.9 years (95% CI: −0.9, 4.7) and 4.2 (95% CI: 2.0, 6.4) older than monolinguals at the time of dementia and AD diagnosis, respectively. The mean difference between the two subgroups was not significant. There was no significant risk reduction (odds ratio: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.68-1.16) in developing dementia among bilinguals vs. monolinguals. Also, there was no significant difference (Hedges' g = 0.05; 95% CI: −0.13, 0.24) in disease severity at dementia diagnosis between bilinguals and monolinguals, despite bilinguals being significantly older. The majority of studies had adjusted for level of education suggesting that education might not have played a role in the observed delay in dementia among bilinguals vs. monolinguals. Although findings indicated that bilingualism was on average related to a delayed onset of dementia, the magnitude of this relationship varied across different settings. This variation may be due to unexplained heterogeneity and different sources of bias in the included studies. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42015019100.

ObjectivesHealth literacy encompasses a broad skill set linked to patients' self‐management ability and the complexity of their health care environments. Self‐management in the context of multimorbidity is particularly challenging, placing patients at risk of poor clinical outcomes. This study aimed to explore the prognostic associations between health literacy domains, depression, and 12‐month health care utilization and mortality in patients with diabetes and end‐stage renal disease (DM‐ESRD).DesignObservational study.MethodsPatients with DM‐ESRD undergoing haemodialysis were recruited. Information on all‐cause hospitalization/admission and mortality of participants was recorded. Negative binomial and Cox regressions were used to model risk factors for hospitalization and mortality.ResultsA total 221 participants [median age: 59 years, 61.6% men, 54.8% Chinese] were recruited. Differences in health literacy were found as a function of age, ethnicity, relationship status, and education. After adjusting for demographic and clinical factors, the HLQ domain Actively Managing My Health remained independently associated with lower rates of hospitalization (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.674, 95% CI [0.490, 0.925], p = .02) and mortality (hazard ratio = 0.382, 95% CI [0.160, 0.848], p = .02). Cumulative hospitalization days were associated with employment status (IRR = 2.242, 95% CI [1.223, 4.113], p = .009), albumin (IRR = 0.918, 95% CI [0.854, 0.988], p = .02), HbA1c (IRR = 1.183, 95% CI [1.028, 1.360], p = .02), comorbidity burden (IRR = 1.137, 95% CI [1.003, 1.289], p = .04), and depression (IRR = 1.059, 95% CI [1.003, 1.118], p = .04) but no health literacy domains.ConclusionsHealth literacy skills related to Actively Managing My Health predict hospitalization and mortality independently of other risk factors. The HLQ provides an assessement of novel health literacy parameters which offer new insights into patients’ status and behaviours and may strengthen interventions to improve clinical services, and patient outcomes in DM‐ESRD. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Patients with diabetes (DM) comprise the fastest growing segment of patients with end‐stage renal disease (ESRD). Health literacy (HL) is pivotal for managing the complex treatment guidelines for DM‐ESRD. Most prior work on HL focused on functional HL and shown significant associations with mortality and hospitalization. Limited research has investigated wider HL skills in relation to clinical outcomes. What does this study add? Supporting patients in Actively Managing my health liteacy skills is critical in decreasing probability of hospitalization and morbidity. The presence of symptoms of depression is associated with longer hospitalization period.

Introduction Assistive technology and telecare (ATT) may alleviate psychological burden in informal caregivers of people with dementia. This study assessed the impact of ATT on informal caregivers’ burden and psychological well‐being. Methods Individuals with dementia and their informal caregivers were recruited to a randomized‐controlled trial assessing effectiveness of ATT. Caregivers were allocated to two groups according to their cared‐for person's randomization to a full or basic package of ATT and were assessed on caregiver burden, state anxiety, and depression. Caregivers’ data from three assessments over 6 months of the trial were analyzed. Results No significant between‐ or within‐group differences at any time point on caregivers’ burden, anxiety, and depression levels were found. Discussion Full ATT for people with dementia did not impact caregivers’ psychological outcomes compared to basic ATT. The length of follow up was restricted to 6 months.

Background Assistive technology and telecare have been promoted to manage the risks associated with independent living for people with dementia, but there is limited evidence of their effectiveness. Objectives This trial aimed to establish whether or not assistive technology and telecare assessments and interventions extend the time that people with dementia can continue to live independently at home and whether or not they are cost-effective. Caregiver burden, the quality of life of caregivers and of people with dementia and whether or not assistive technology and telecare reduce safety risks were also investigated. Design This was a pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. Blinding was not undertaken as it was not feasible to do so. All consenting participants were included in an intention-to-treat analysis. Setting This trial was set in 12 councils in England with adult social services responsibilities. Participants Participants were people with dementia living in the community who had an identified need that might benefit from assistive technology and telecare. Interventions Participants were randomly assigned to receive either assistive technology and telecare recommended by a health or social care professional to meet their assessed needs (a full assistive technology and telecare package) or a pendant alarm, non-monitored smoke and carbon monoxide detectors and a key safe (a basic assistive technology and telecare package). Main outcome measures The primary outcomes were time to admission to care and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes assessed caregivers using the 10-item Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, the State–Trait Anxiety Inventory 6-item scale and the Zarit Burden Interview. Results Of 495 participants, 248 were randomised to receive full assistive technology and telecare and 247 received the limited control. Comparing the assistive technology and telecare group with the control group, the hazard ratio for institutionalisation was 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.58 to 1.01; p = 0.054). After adjusting for an imbalance in the baseline activities of daily living score between trial arms, the hazard ratio was 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.63 to 1.12; p = 0.20). At 104 weeks, there were no significant differences between groups in health and social care resource use costs (intervention group – control group difference: mean –£909, 95% confidence interval –£5336 to £3345) or in societal costs (intervention group – control group difference: mean –£3545; 95% confidence interval –£13,914 to £6581). At 104 weeks, based on quality-adjusted life-years derived from the participant-rated EuroQol-5 Dimensions questionnaire, the intervention group had 0.105 (95% confidence interval –0.204 to –0.007) fewer quality-adjusted life-years than the control group. The number of quality-adjusted life-years derived from the proxy-rated EuroQol-5 Dimensions questionnaire did not differ between groups. Caregiver outcomes did not differ between groups over 24 weeks. Limitations Compliance with the assigned trial arm was variable, as was the quality of assistive technology and telecare needs assessments. Attrition from assessments led to data loss additional to that attributable to care home admission and censoring events. Conclusions A full package of assistive technology and telecare did not increase the length of time that participants with dementia remained in the community, and nor did it decrease caregiver burden, depression or anxiety, relative to a basic package of assistive technology and telecare. Use of the full assistive technology and telecare package did not increase participants’ health and social care or societal costs. Quality-adjusted life-years based on participants’ EuroQol-5 Dimensions questionnaire responses were reduced in the intervention group compared with the control group; groups did not differ in the number of quality-adjusted life-years based on the proxy-rated EuroQol-5 Dimensions questionnaire. Future work Future work could examine whether or not improved assessment that is more personalised to an individual is beneficial. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN86537017. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 19. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

This systematic review was registered a priori (PROSPERO, CRD42016043956).

BackgroundUtility scores are integral to health economics decision-making. Typically, utility scores have not been scored or developed with mental health service users. The aims of this study were to i) collaborate with service users to develop descriptions of five mental health states (psychosis, depression, eating disorder, medication side effects and self-harm); ii) explore feasibility and acceptability of using scenario-based health states in an e-survey; iii) evaluate which utility measures (standard gamble (SG), time trade off (TTO) and rating scale (RS)) are preferred; and iv) determine how different participant groups discriminate between the health scenarios and rank them.Design and methodsThis was a co-produced mixed methods cross-sectional online survey. Utility scores were generated using the SG, TTO and RS methods; difficulty of the completing each method, markers of acceptability and participants’ preference were also assessed.ResultsA total of 119 participants (58%) fully completed the survey. For any given health state, SG consistently generated higher utility scores compared to RS and for some health states higher also than TTO (i.e. SG produces inflated utility scores relative to RS and TTO). Results suggest that different utility measures produce different evaluations of described health states. The TTO was preferred by all participant groups over the SG. The three participant groups scored four (of five) health scenarios comparably. Psychosis scored as the worst health state to live with while medication side-effects were viewed more positively than other scenarios (depression, eating disorders, self-harm) by all participant groups. However, there was a difference in how the depression scenario was scored, with service users giving depression a lower utility score compared to other groups.ConclusionMental health state scenarios used to generate utility scores can be co-produced and are well received by a broad range of participants. Utility valuations using SG, TTO and RS were feasible for use with service users, carers, healthcare professionals and members of the general public. Future studies of utility scores in psychiatry should aim to include mental health service users as both co-investigators and respondents.

No abstract