Cochrane Dementia And Cognitive Improvement Group Research Articles

Non-pharmacological interventions for patients with dementia: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background:This protocol for a systematic review describes the methods that will be used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological interventions for patients with dementia.Methods:We will search ALOIS, the specialized register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), without language or publication status restrictions. Additional separate searches will be run in many of the above six databases to ensure the most up-to-date results are retrieved.The study selection and data extraction will be performed independently by two authors and only randomized controlled trials will be included. The risk of bias will be assessed independently by two authors following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We will use RevMan software and random-effects models to assess the heterogeneity and data synthesis.If any plan for documenting important protocol amendments changes, the researchers will make a revision agreement and then register the modification on PROSPERO.Conclusion:Through this systematic review, a comprehensive understanding of current non-pharmacological interventions on dementia will be available. Meanwhile, it will provide basic evidence for further clinical research.Ethics and dissemination:Ethical approval is not required because no individual patient's data are included in this paper. This study will be disseminated through conference presentation.Prospero registration number:CRD42019136435

Interventions for preventing delirium in older people in institutional long-term care.

Interventions for preventing delirium in older people in institutional long-term care.

Computerised cognitive training for maintaining cognitive function in cognitively healthy people in midlife.

Normal aging is associated with changes in cognitive function that are non-pathological and are not necessarily indicative of future neurocognitive disease. Low cognitive and brain reserve and limited cognitive stimulation are associated with increased risk of dementia. Emerging evidence now suggests that subtle cognitive changes, detectable years before criteria for mild cognitive impairment are met, may be predictive of future dementia. Important for intervention and reduction in disease risk, research also suggests that engaging in stimulating mental activity throughout adulthood builds cognitive and brain reserve and reduces dementia risk. Therefore, midlife (defined here as 40 to 65 years) may be a suitable time to introduce cognitive interventions for maintaining cognitive function and, in the longer term, possibly preventing or delaying the onset of clinical dementia. To evaluate the effects of computerised cognitive training interventions lasting at least 12 weeks for maintaining or improving cognitive function in cognitively healthy people in midlife. We searched up to 31 March 2018 in ALOIS (www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/alois), the specialised register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG). We ran additional searches in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO Portal/ICTRP at www.apps.who.int/trialsearch, to ensure that the search was as comprehensive and as up-to-date as possible, to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing trials. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs, published or unpublished, reported in any language. Participants were cognitively healthy people between 40 and 65 years of age (80% of study population within this age range). Experimental interventions adhered to the following criteria: intervention was any form of interactive computerised cognitive intervention - including computer exercises, computer games, mobile devices, gaming console, and virtual reality - that involved repeated practice on standardised exercises of specified cognitive domain(s) for the purpose of enhancing cognitive function; duration of the intervention was at least 12 weeks; cognitive outcomes were measured; and cognitive training interventions were compared with active or inactive control interventions. For preliminary screening of search results, we used a 'crowd' method to identify RCTs. At least two review authors working independently screened remaining citations against inclusion criteria; independently extracted data; and assessed the quality of the included trial, using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. We used GRADE to describe the overall quality of the evidence. We identified one eligible study that examined the effect of computerised cognitive training (CCT) in 6742 participants over 50 years of age, with training and follow-up duration of six months. We considered the study to be at high risk of attrition bias and the overall quality of the evidence to be low.Researchers provided no data on our primary outcome. Results indicate that there may be a small advantage for the CCT group for executive function (mean difference (MD) -1.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.85 to -1.29; participants = 3994; low-quality evidence) and a very small advantage for the control group for working memory (MD 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.15; participants = 5831; low-quality evidence). The intervention may have had little or no effect on episodic memory (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.04; participants = 3090; low-quality evidence). We found low-quality evidence from only one study. We are unable to determine whether computerised cognitive training is effective in maintaining global cognitive function among healthy adults in midlife. We strongly recommend that high-quality studies be undertaken to investigate the effectiveness and acceptability of cognitive training in midlife, using interventions that last long enough that they may have enduring effects on cognitive and brain reserve, and with investigators following up long enough to assess effects on clinically important outcomes in later life.

Music-based therapeutic interventions for people with dementia.

Dementia is a clinical syndrome with a number of different causes which is characterised by deterioration in cognitive, behavioural, social and emotional functions. Pharmacological interventions are available but have limited effect to treat many of the syndrome's features. Less research has been directed towards non-pharmacological treatments. In this review, we examined the evidence for effects of music-based interventions. To assess the effects of music-based therapeutic interventions for people with dementia on emotional well-being including quality of life, mood disturbance or negative affect, behavioural problems, social behaviour and cognition at the end of therapy and four or more weeks after the end of treatment. We searched ALOIS, the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG) on 19 June 2017 using the terms: music therapy, music, singing, sing, auditory stimulation. Additional searches were carried out on 19 June 2017 in the major healthcare databases MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS; and in trial registers and grey literature sources. We included randomised controlled trials of music-based therapeutic interventions (at least five sessions) for people with dementia that measured any of our outcomes of interest. Control groups either received usual care or other activities with or without music. Two review authors worked independently to screen the retrieved studies against the inclusion criteria and then to extract data and assess methodological quality of the included studies. If necessary, we contacted trial authors to ask for additional data, including relevant subscales, or for other missing information. We pooled data using random-effects models. We included 22 studies with 1097 randomised participants. Twenty-one studies with 890 participants contributed data to meta-analyses. Participants in the studies had dementia of varying degrees of severity, and all were resident in institutions. Seven studies delivered an individual music intervention; the other studies delivered the intervention to groups of participants. Most interventions involved both active and receptive musical elements. The methodological quality of the studies varied. All were at high risk of performance bias and some were at high risk of detection or other bias.At the end of treatment, we found low-quality evidence that the interventions may improve emotional well-being and quality of life (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 0.62; 9 studies, 348 participants) and reduce anxiety (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.72 to -0.14; 13 studies, 478 participants). We found low-quality evidence that music-based therapeutic interventions may have little or no effect on cognition (SMD 0.15, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.36; 7 studies, 350 participants). There was moderate-quality evidence that the interventions reduce depressive symptoms (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.09; 11 studies, 503 participants) and overall behaviour problems (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.01; 10 studies, 442 participants), but do not decrease agitation or aggression (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.10; 14 studies, 626 participants). The quality of the evidence on social behaviour was very low, so effects were very uncertain.The evidence for long-term outcomes measured four or more weeks after the end of treatment was of very low quality for anxiety and social behaviour, and for the other outcomes, it was of low quality for little or no effect (with small SMDs, between 0.03 and 0.34). Providing people with dementia who are in institutional care with at least five sessions of a music-based therapeutic intervention probably reduces depressive symptoms and improves overall behavioural problems at the end of treatment. It may also improve emotional well-being and quality of life and reduce anxiety, but may have little or no effect on agitation or aggression or on cognition. We are uncertain about effects on social behaviour and about long-term effects. Future studies should examine the duration of effects in relation to the overall duration of treatment and the number of sessions.

Cognitive tests to help diagnose dementia in symptomatic people in primary care and the community.

What brief cognitive test should a busy GP use when trying to assess someone who might have dementia? The menu of choices is long; one review found 11 options.1 The Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG) is conducting a series of reviews to evaluate the evidence of a range of tests for diagnosing dementia. To date, reviews have been published addressing the accuracy of two tests in primary care: the Informant Questionnaire for Cognitive Disorders in the Elderly (IQCODE) and the Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE]. Reviewers found only one study that investigated the use of the IQCODE in primary care,2 and six that investigated the use of the MMSE.3 A review of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MoCA] found no studies that evaluated the accuracy of the test in primary care.4 Reviews are underway for the Mini-Cog and AD-8 tests (see http://dta.cochrane.org/reviews-and-protocols-crg). The IQCODE is a structured informant questionnaire; 26-item and 16-item versions exist and scores range from 1 (no impairment) to 5 (more impairment).4 In the one study that investigated the use of the IQCODE at a threshold of 3.2 in primary care the sensitivity was 100% and specificity 76%, whereas at a threshold of 3.7 the sensitivity was 75% and specificity 98%.2 The MMSE is one of the oldest and therefore …

Effect of the treatment of Type 2 diabetes mellitus on the development of cognitive impairment and dementia.

Prevention of cognitive impairment and dementia is an important public health goal. Epidemiological evidence shows a relationship between cognitive impairment and Type 2 diabetes mellitus. The risk of dementia increases with duration of disease. This updated systematic review investigated the effect on cognitive function of the type of treatment and level of metabolic control in people with Type 2 diabetes. To assess the effects of different strategies for managing Type 2 diabetes mellitus on cognitive function and the incidence of dementia. We searched ALOIS (the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG)), the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS on 15 October 2016. ALOIS contains records from all major health care databases, (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS), as well as from many trials' registers and grey literature sources. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared two or more different treatments for Type 2 diabetes mellitus and in which cognitive function was measured at baseline and after treatment. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the included RCTs. We pooled data for comparable trials and estimated the effects of treatment by using risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs), according to the nature of the outcome. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE methods. We identified seven eligible studies but only four provided data we could include in efficacy analyses. Two of these studies compared intensive versus standard glycaemic control and two compared different pharmacological treatments. All studies were at unclear risk of bias in at least two domains and one large study was at high risk of performance and detection bias.(a) Two studies with 13,934 participants at high cardiovascular risk provided efficacy data on intensive versus standard glycaemic control. A third study with 1791 participants provided additional data on hypoglycaemic episodes and mortality. There is probably no difference between treatment groups in the number of participants who decline by at least 3 points on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) over five years (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.08; 1 study; n = 11,140; moderate-quality evidence); and there may also be little or no difference in the incidence of dementia (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.85; 1 study; n = 11,140; low-quality evidence). From another study, there was probably little or no difference in MMSE score after 40 months (MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.16; 1 study; n = 2794; moderate quality evidence). Participants exposed to the intensive glycaemic control strategy probably experience more episodes of severe hypoglycaemia than those who have standard treatment (RR 2.18, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.14; 2 studies; n = 12,827; moderate-quality evidence). The evidence from these trials suggests that the intensity of glycaemic control may have little or no effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.13; 3 studies; n = 15,888; low-quality evidence).(b) One study with 156 participants compared glibenclamide (glyburide) with repaglinide. There may be a small advantage of glibenclamide on global cognitive function measured with the MMSE after 12 months (MD -0.90, 95% CI -1.68 to -0.12; low-quality evidence). No data were reported on the incidence of dementia, hypoglycaemic events or all-cause mortality.(c) One study with 145 participants compared rosiglitazone plus metformin to glibenclamide (glyburide) plus metformin over 24 weeks. It reported only on cognitive subdomains and not on global cognitive function, incidence of MCI or dementia, hypoglycaemic events or all causes of mortality. We found no good evidence that any specific treatment or treatment strategy for Type 2 diabetes can prevent or delay cognitive impairment. The best available evidence related to the comparison of intensive with standard glycaemic control strategies. Here there was moderate-quality evidence that the strategies do not differ in their effect on global cognitive functioning over 40 to 60 months.

Assistive technology for memory support in dementia.

The sustained interest in electronic assistive technology in dementia care has been fuelled by the urgent need to develop useful approaches to help support people with dementia at home. Also the low costs and wide availability of electronic devices make it more feasible to use electronic devices for the benefit of disabled persons. Information Communication Technology (ICT) devices designed to support people with dementia are usually referred to as Assistive Technology (AT) or Electronic Assistive Technology (EAT). By using AT in this review we refer to electronic assistive devices. A range of AT devices has been developed to support people with dementia and their carers to manage their daily activities and to enhance safety, for example electronic pill boxes, picture phones, or mobile tracking devices. Many are commercially available. However, the usefulness and user-friendliness of these devices are often poorly evaluated. Although reviews of (electronic) memory aids do exist, a systematic review of studies focusing on the efficacy of AT for memory support in people with dementia is lacking. Such a review would guide people with dementia and their informal and professional carers in selecting appropriate AT devices. Primary objectiveTo assess the efficacy of AT for memory support in people with dementia in terms of daily performance of personal and instrumental activities of daily living (ADL), level of dependency, and admission to long-term care. Secondary objectiveTo assess the impact of AT on: users (autonomy, usefulness and user-friendliness, adoption of AT); cognitive function and neuropsychiatric symptoms; need for informal and formal care; perceived quality of life; informal carer burden, self-esteem and feelings of competence; formal carer work satisfaction, workload and feelings of competence; and adverse events. We searched ALOIS, the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), on 10 November 2016. ALOIS is maintained by the Information Specialists of the CDCIG and contains studies in the areas of dementia prevention, dementia treatment and cognitive enhancement in healthy people. We also searched the following list of databases, adapting the search strategy as necessary: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) Databases, up to May 2016; The Collection of Computer Science Bibliographies; DBLP Computer Science Bibliography; HCI Bibliography: Human-Computer Interaction Resources; and AgeInfo, all to June 2016; PiCarta; Inspec; Springer Link Lecture Notes; Social Care Online; and IEEE Computer Society Digital Library, all to October 2016; J-STAGE: Japan Science and Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic; and Networked Computer Science Technical Reference Library (NCSTRL), both to November 2016; Computing Research Repository (CoRR) up to December 2016; and OT seeker; and ADEAR, both to February 2017. In addition, we searched Google Scholar and OpenSIGLE for grey literature. We intended to review randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and clustered randomised trials with blinded assessment of outcomes that evaluated an electronic assistive device used with the single aim of supporting memory function in people diagnosed with dementia. The control interventions could either be 'care (or treatment) as usual' or non-technological psychosocial interventions (including interventions that use non-electronic assistive devices) also specifically aimed at supporting memory. Outcome measures included activities of daily living, level of dependency, clinical and care-related outcomes (for example admission to long-term care), perceived quality of life and well-being, and adverse events resulting from the use of AT; as well as the effects of AT on carers. Two review authors independently screened all titles and abstracts identified by the search. We identified no studies which met the inclusion criteria. This review highlights the current lack of high-quality evidence to determine whether AT is effective in supporting people with dementia to manage their memory problems.

Music-based therapeutic interventions for people with dementia.

Dementia is a clinical syndrome with a number of different causes which is characterised by deterioration in cognitive, behavioural, social and emotional functions. Pharmacological interventions are available but have limited effect to treat many of the syndrome's features. Less research has been directed towards non-pharmacological treatments. In this review, we examined the evidence for effects of music-based interventions as a treatment. To assess the effects of music-based therapeutic interventions for people with dementia on emotional well-being including quality of life, mood disturbance or negative affect, behavioural problems, social behaviour, and cognition at the end of therapy and four or more weeks after the end of treatment. We searched ALOIS, the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG) on 14 April 2010 using the terms: music therapy, music, singing, sing, auditory stimulation. Additional searches were also carried out on 3 July 2015 in the major healthcare databases MEDLINE, Embase, psycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS; and in trial registers and grey literature sources. On 12 April 2016, we searched the major databases for new studies for future evaluation. We included randomized controlled trials of music-based therapeutic interventions (at least five sessions) for people with dementia that measured any of our outcomes of interest. Control groups either received usual care or other activities. Two reviewers worked independently to screen the retrieved studies against the inclusion criteria and then to extract data and assess methodological quality of the included studies. If necessary, we contacted trial authors to ask for additional data, including relevant subscales, or for other missing information. We pooled data using random-effects models. We included 17 studies. Sixteen studies with a total of 620 participants contributed data to meta-analyses. Participants in the studies had dementia of varying degrees of severity, but all were resident in institutions. Five studies delivered an individual music intervention; in the others, the intervention was delivered to groups of participants. Most interventions involved both active and receptive musical elements. The methodological quality of the studies varied. All were at high risk of performance bias and some were at high risk of detection or other bias. At the end of treatment, we found low-quality evidence that music-based therapeutic interventions may have little or no effect on emotional well-being and quality of life (standardized mean difference, SMD 0.32, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.71; 6 studies, 181 participants), overall behaviour problems (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.17; 6 studies, 209 participants) and cognition (SMD 0.21, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.45; 6 studies, 257 participants). We found moderate-quality evidence that they reduce depressive symptoms (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.07; 9 studies, 376 participants), but do not decrease agitation or aggression (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.14; 12 studies, 515 participants). The quality of the evidence on anxiety and social behaviour was very low, so effects were very uncertain. The evidence for all long-term outcomes was also of very low quality. Providing people with dementia with at least five sessions of a music-based therapeutic intervention probably reduces depressive symptoms but has little or no effect on agitation or aggression. There may also be little or no effect on emotional well-being or quality of life, overall behavioural problems and cognition. We are uncertain about effects on anxiety or social behaviour, and about any long-term effects. Future studies should employ larger sample sizes, and include all important outcomes, in particular 'positive' outcomes such as emotional well-being and social outcomes. Future studies should also examine the duration of effects in relation to the overall duration of treatment and the number of sessions.

Light therapy for improving cognition, activities of daily living, sleep, challenging behaviour, and psychiatric disturbances in dementia.

Rest-activity and sleep-wake cycles are controlled by the endogenous circadian rhythm generated by the suprachiasmatic nuclei (SCN) of the hypothalamus. Degenerative changes in the SCN appear to be a biological basis for circadian disturbances in people with dementia, and might be reversed by stimulation of the SCN by light. The review examines the effectiveness of light therapy in improving cognition, activities of daily living (ADLs), sleep, challenging behaviour, and psychiatric symptoms associated with dementia. ALOIS, the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS were searched on 20 January 2014 using the terms: "bright light*", "light box*", "light visor*", "dawn-dusk*", phototherapy, "photo therapy", "light therapy" "light treatment", light* . The CDCIG Specialized Register contains records from all major healthcare databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS) as well as from many trials databases and grey literature sources. All relevant, randomized controlled trials were included in which light therapy, at any intensity and duration, was compared with a control group for the effect of improving cognition, ADLs, sleep, challenging behaviour, and psychiatric symptoms associated with dementia (as well as institutionalization rates or cost of care). Included were people with dementia of any type and degree of severity. Two review authors independently assessed the retrieved articles for relevance, and four review authors independently assessed the selected studies for risk of bias and extracted the data. Statistically significant differences in outcomes between the treatment and control groups at the end of treatment and follow-up were examined. Each study was summarized using a measure of effect (for example mean difference). Eleven trials (13 articles) met the inclusion criteria. However, three of the studies could not be included in the analyses either because the reported data could not be used in the meta-analysis or we were unable to retrieve the required data from the authors.This updated review found no effect of light therapy on cognitive function, sleep, challenging behaviour (for example agitation), or psychiatric symptoms associated with dementia. Reduction in the development of ADL limitations was reported in one study, at three of five time points, and light therapy was found to have an effect after six weeks and two years but not after one year. There is insufficient evidence to justify the use of bright light therapy in dementia. Further research should concentrate on replicating the suggested effect on ADLs, and establishing the biological mechanism for how light therapy improves these important outcomes.

Thiamine for prevention and treatment of Wernicke-Korsakoff Syndrome in people who abuse alcohol

Autopsy studies suggest that Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome (WKS) is not a rare disorder, particularly in individuals who abuse alcohol. Thiamine has been established as the treatment of choice for over 50 years, but uncertainty remains about appropriate dosage and duration. Current practice guidelines are based on case reports and clinical experience. This is an update of a review first published in 2004 and last updated in 2008. • To assess the efficacy of thiamine in preventing and treating the manifestations of WKS due to excess alcohol consumption. • To determine the optimum form, dose and duration of thiamine treatment for this indication. ALOIS, the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS were searched on 6 September 2012 using the term thiamine OR aneurine. ALOIS contains records from all major health care databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS) as well as from many trial databases and grey literature sources. Any randomised trials comparing thiamine with alternative interventions or comparing different thiamine regimens (varying in formulation, dose or duration of administration). All abstracts were independently inspected by two reviewers (ED and PWB), and relevant articles were retrieved and assessed for methodological quality using criteria provided in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Two studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria, but only one contained sufficient data for quantitative analysis. Ambrose (2001) randomly assigned participants (n = 107) to one of five doses of intramuscular thiamine and measured outcomes after 2 days of treatment. We compared the lowest dose (5 mg/day) with each of the other four doses. A significant difference favoured 200 mg/day compared with the 5-mg/day dose in determining the number of trials needed to meet inclusion criteria on a delayed alternation test (mean difference (MD) -17.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -35.4 to -0.40, P = 0.04). No significant differences emerged when the other doses were compared with 5 mg/day. The pattern of results did not reflect a simple dose-response relationship. The study had methodological shortcomings in design and in the presentation of results that limited further analysis. Evidence from randomised controlled clinical trials is insufficient to guide clinicians in determining the dose, frequency, route or duration of thiamine treatment for prophylaxis against or treatment of WKS due to alcohol abuse.

Antipsychotics can be withdrawn from many older people with dementia, though caution is needed for people with more severe neuropsychiatric symptoms

Question: Is the withdrawal of antipsychotic medication in older people with dementia and neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) feasible, safe and effective? Outcomes: Primary outcomes: success of withdrawal strategy, defined as remaining...

Withdrawal versus continuation of chronic antipsychotic drugs for behavioural and psychological symptoms in older people with dementia

Withdrawal versus continuation of chronic antipsychotic drugs for behavioural and psychological symptoms in older people with dementia

Ginseng for cognition

Ginseng is a herbal medicine in widespread use throughout the world. Its effect on the brain and nervous system has been investigated. It has been suggested, on the basis of both laboratory and clinical studies, that it may have beneficial effects on cognitive performance. To evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of ginseng given to improve cognitive performance in healthy participants, participants with cognitive impairment or dementia.To highlight the quality and quantity of research evidence available. The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, clinical trials registries and grey literature sources were searched on 24 February 2009 using the following terms: ginseng* OR panax OR ginsan OR "Jen Shen"OR shinseng OR Renshen OR schinseng OR ninjin OR gingilone OR panaxoside* OR ginsenoside* OR protopanaxa* OR protopanaxadiol OR protopanaxatriol OR panaxagin OR ginsenol OR ginsenine and terms for dementia and cognition. The CDCIG Specialized Register contains records from all major health care databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS) as well as from many clinical trials registries and grey literature sources. All double-blind and single-blind randomized, placebo controlled trials assessing the effects of ginseng on cognitive function were eligible for inclusion. Interventions were considered to be ginseng if they were compounds containing ginseng or active agents of the Panax genus as the major component. Characteristics of each included trial were extracted independently by two reviewers using a self-developed data extraction form and entered into RevMan 5.0 software. Authors of identified trials were contacted for additional information and unpublished data. The effects of ginseng in healthy participants, participants with cognitive impairment or dementia were addressed independently. Nine randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trials meeting the inclusion criteria were identified. Eight trials enrolled healthy participants, and one was of subjects with age-associated memory impairment (AAMI).Only five of the identified trials had extractable information and were included in the analysis. Four studies investigated the effects of ginseng extract and one assessed the efficacy of ginseng compound HT008-1. All of these trials investigated the effects of ginseng on healthy participants. Pooling the data was impossible owing to heterogeneity in outcome measures, trial duration, and ginseng dosage. Results of the analysis suggested improvement of some aspects of cognitive function, behavior and quality of life. No serious adverse events associated with ginseng were found. Currently, there is a lack of convincing evidence to show a cognitive enhancing effect of Panax ginseng in healthy participants and no high quality evidence about its efficacy in patients with dementia. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group trials with large sample sizes are needed to further investigate the effect of ginseng on cognition in different populations, including dementia patients.

Special care units for dementia individuals with behavioural problems

The behavioural problems of people with dementia are often considered as one of the most challenging issues in caring. Special Care Units (SCUs) have flourished since the 1980s with the aim of taking care of dementia patients, usually those with Alzheimer's disease, and in particular for those with behavioural problems. Although lacking a standard definition, SCUs are usually situated within nursing homes and commonly include the features of trained staffing, special programming, a modified physical environment, and family involvement. The costs of SCUs are commonly higher than for 'standard' nursing home care. However, evaluat ions of the outcomes of SCUs have yielded conflicting results. A systematic review of this evidence is therefore warranted . To evaluate the effect of SCUs on behavioural problems, mood, use of restraints and psychotropic medication in patients with dementia. The trials were identified from a search of the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL on 6 September 2007 using the search terms: Special Care Units or SCUs. The CDCIG Specialized Register contains records from major healthcare databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and LILACS as well as many ongoing trial databases and grey literature sources. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which the outcomes of SCUs were compared against traditional nursing units (nursing homes, skilled nursing facilities) were included. Two reviewing authors independently read the full reports of the potentially eligible studies and selected those that met the inclusion criteria. Discrepancies were resolved by discussions among the two reviewing authors. Final consensus was reached with input from a third member of the team when necessary. No RCTs meeting the selection criteria were identified. Since it is unlikely, for ethical and practical reasons that an RCT of SCUs will be conducted, a systematic review of non-RCTs using the same protocol and criteria was conducted. There were eight non-RCTs that fulfilled the criteria for inclusion. Only four studies had data which could be extracted for pooling in meta-analysis. Differences between comparator groups in these nonRCTs ? for example in severity of dementia - w ere not adequately adjusted for and were common in the trial which accounted for almost all of the positive outcomes of SCUs (Nobili, 2006)All of the results of the outcomes came only from single studies except for "physical restraint use" at 6 months, which included data from two studies. A small improvement in total Neuropsychiatric Inventory scores, favouring SCU was noted in one study at 6, 12 and 18 months. The use of physical restraints was less common in SCUs at 6 and 12 months (OR= 0.46 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.80), p=0.006; and OR=0.49 (0.27 to 0.88), p=0.02 respectively). Patients in SCUs were less depressed at 3 months than those in traditional nursing home (WMD -6.30 (-7.88 to -4.72) Cornell points, p<0.00001). There was only one observation that favoured the control group: a small but significant effect favouring traditional nursing home care was observed at 6 months in the mean number of psychotropic medications used (WMD 0.20, CI 0.00 to 0.40, z=1.96, P=0.05). There are no identified RCTs investigating the effects of SCUs on behavioural symptoms in dementia, and no strong evidence of benefit from the available non-RCTs. It is probably more important to implement best practice than to provide a specialized care environment. The routine collection of data on behaviour, restraint and psychotropic drug use across multiple nursing home settings offers the best modality for formal evaluation of the benefit or otherwise of SCUs.

Valproate preparations for agitation in dementia

Agitation affects up to 70% of older people with dementia. Valproic acid derivatives have been used for the past 10 years to control agitation in dementia, but no systematic review of the effectiveness of this treatment has been published to date. A systematic review of 2004 examined three randomised, placebo-controlled trials of the effect of valproate therapy on older people with dementia who were agitated. The review was updated (October 2008) to include two additional studies. To determine whether evidence supports the use of valproate preparations in the treatment of agitation of people with dementia. The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS were searched on 7 February 2008 using the terms: valproic OR valproate OR divalproex* . The CDCIG Specialized Register contains records from all major health care databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS) as well as from many trials databases and grey literature sources. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials with concealed allocation where agitation and dementia of participants were assessed 1. Two reviewers extracted data from published trials 2. Odds ratios of average differences were calculated 3. Only "intention to treat" analyses were included 4. Analysis compared participants treated with valproic acid with controls Meta-analysis in 2004 of the pooled results was limited because of the following problems.In Porsteinsson 2001, although the physicians having direct responsibility for patient care were blinded, a non-blinded physician, who had no direct contact with these physicians, adjusted divalproex sodium dosage on the basis of reports from blinded raters and from confidential laboratory reports. Therefore, because the physician who controlled therapy knew which patients were receiving divalproex, the trial did not satisfy the criterion of concealed allocation.In Tariot 2001, 54% of the treated patients dropped out compared with 29% of control patients. Of all treated patients, 22% dropped out because of adverse effects, and the study had to be discontinued prematurely.The third trial (Sival 2002) had a cross-over design. No results from the first phase of the study were available, and although the statistical section stated, "the t-test for independent samples is used to analyse the two-period cross-over trial", because the samples were not independent - they are the same patients in the treatment and placebo groups - a question must be raised about the correctness of the analyses.The valproate preparation used in the trials varied - one used short-acting sodium valproate, one long-acting divalproex sodium, and the third early-onset acting divalproex sodium. Average doses differed (480 mg/d - 1000 mg/d), as did duration of therapy (3 weeks - 6 weeks), and ways of evaluating patients and their response to therapy.A limited meta-analysis, pooling the results concerning adverse effects (Porsteinsson 2001, Tariot 2001) revealed the following: sedation occurred more frequently in patients treated with valproic acid than in controls. Urinary tract infection was more common among patients treated with valproic acid than controls.An updated systematic review (October 2008) of two new studies (Tariot 2005, Herrmann 2007) applied meta-analysis to the effect of valproate on agitation in demented patients and also combined these studies with the earlier reports to examine adverse effects among valproate treated patients. Because the study of Herrmann et al involved a cross-over design, only those results from the first part of this study were included in the updated review.The new meta-analysis of pooled results showed no improvement of agitation among valproate treated patients, compared with controls, and showed an increase in adverse events (falls, infection, gastrointestinal disorders) among valproate treated patients. The updated review corroborates the earlier findings that valproate preparations are ineffective in treating agitation among demented patients, and that valproate therapy is associated with an unacceptable rate of adverse effects. More research on the use of valproate preparations for agitation of people with dementia is needed. On the basis of current evidence, valproate therapy cannot be recommended for management of agitation in dementia.

Huperzine A for vascular dementia.

Huperzine A, a form of herbal medicine, has been considered as an alternative treatment for vascular dementia (VaD) in China. To assess the efficacy and safety of Huperzine A in patients with vascular dementia. The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG) was searched on 7 July 2008 using the terms: huperzi* OR ayapin OR scoparon*. The CDCIG Specialized Register contains records from all major health care databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS) as well as from many trials databases and grey literature sources. The review authors searched the following databases in August 2008 using the terms 'Huperzine A', 'Shishanjianjia', 'Haboyin' and 'Shuangyiping': The Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM) (1977 to August 2008); Chinese Science and Technique Journals Database (VIP) (1989 to August 2008); China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) (1979 to August 2008); The Chinese Clinical Trials Register (ChiCTR, August 2008); Google (August 2008). In addition, the review authors searched reference lists, relevant clinical trials and contacted researchers in an effort to identify further published and unpublished studies. Randomized controlled trials comparing Huperzine A with placebo in patients with vascular dementia were considered eligible for inclusion. Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. Only one small trial, involving 14 participants, was included. No significant beneficial effect of Huperzine A on the improvement of cognitive function measured by MMSE for VaD (WMD 2.40; 95% CI -4.78 to 9.58) was observed. No death from all causes at the end of treatment were reported. At present, other outcome measures were not available in any of the trials. Although no statistically significant differences were found between the Huperzine A-treated and control groups, the confidence intervals for the treatment effect estimates were wide and included both clinically significant benefits and clinically significant harms. There is no [convincing] evidence that Huperzine A is of value in vascular dementia based on one small trial. It deserves further research.

Enteral tube feeding for older people with advanced dementia

The use of enteral tube feeding for patients with advanced dementia who have poor nutritional intake is common. In one US survey 34% of 186,835 nursing home residents with advanced cognitive impairment were tube fed. Potential benefits or harms of this practice are unclear. To evaluate the outcome of enteral tube nutrition for older people with advanced dementia who develop problems with eating and swallowing and/or have poor nutritional intake. The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS were searched in April 2008. Citation checking was undertaken. Where it was not possible to accept or reject, the full text of the citation was obtained for further evaluation. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series studies that evaluated the effectiveness of enteral feeding via a nasogastric tube or via a tube passed by percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) were planned to be included. In addition, controlled observational studies were included. The study population comprised adults aged 50 and over (either sex), with a diagnosis of primary degenerative dementia made according to validated diagnostic criteria such as DSM-IV or ICD-10 (APA 1994; WHO 1993) and with advanced cognitive impairment defined by a recognised and validated tool or by clinical assessment and had poor nutrition intake and/or develop problems with eating and swallowing. Where data were limited we also considered studies in which the majority of participants had dementia. Data were independently extracted and assessed by one reviewer, checked by a second and if necessary, in the case of any disagreement or discrepancy it was planned that it would be reviewed by the third reviewer. Where information was lacking, we attempted contact with authors. It was planned that meta-analysis would be considered for RCTs with comparable key characteristics. The primary outcomes were survival and quality of life (QoL). No RCTs were identified. Seven observational controlled studies were identified. Six assessed mortality. The other study assessed nutritional outcomes. There was no evidence of increased survival in patients receiving enteral tube feeding. None of the studies examined QoL and there was no evidence of benefit in terms of nutritional status or the prevalence of pressure ulcers. Despite the very large number of patients receiving this intervention, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that enteral tube feeding is beneficial in patients with advanced dementia. Data are lacking on the adverse effects of this intervention.

Cannabinoids for the treatment of dementia

Following the discovery of an endogenous cannabinoid system and the identification of specific cannabinoid receptors in the central nervous system, much work has been done to investigate the main effects of these compounds. There is increasing evidence that the cannabinoid system may regulate neurodegenerative processes such as excessive glutamate production, oxidative stress and neuroinflammation. Neurodegeneration is a feature common to the various types of dementia and this has led to interest in whether cannabinoids may be clinically useful in the treatment of people with dementia. Recent studies have also shown that cannabinoids may have more specific effects in interrupting the pathological process in Alzheimer's disease. To determine from available research whether cannabinoids are clinically effective in the treatment of dementia. The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS were searched on 11 April 2008 using the terms: cannabis or cannabinoid* or endocannabinoid* or cannabidiol or THC or CBD or dronabinol or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol or marijuana or marihuana or hashish. The CDCIG Specialized Register contains records from all major health care databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS) as well as from many clinical trials registries and grey literature sources. All double-blind and single (rater)-blind randomized placebo controlled trials assessing the efficacy of cannabinoids at any dose in the treatment of people with dementia. Two reviewers independently examined the retrieved studies for inclusion according to the selection criteria. They then independently assessed the methodological quality of selected trials and extracted data where possible. Only one study met the inclusion criteria. The data in the study report were presented in such a way that they could not be extracted for further analysis and there was insufficient quantitative data to validate the results. This review finds no evidence that cannabinoids are effective in the improvement of disturbed behaviour in dementia or in the treatment of other symptoms of dementia. More randomized double-blind placebo controlled trials are needed to determine whether cannabinoids are clinically effective in the treatment of dementia.

Ginkgo biloba for cognitive impairment and dementia

Extracts of the leaves of the maidenhair tree, Ginkgo biloba, have long been used in China as a traditional medicine for various disorders of health. A standardized extract is widely prescribed for the treatment of a range of conditions including memory and concentration problems, confusion, depression, anxiety, dizziness, tinnitus and headache. The mechanisms of action are thought to reflect the action of several components of the extract and include increasing blood supply by dilating blood vessels, reducing blood viscosity, modification of neurotransmitter systems, and reducing the density of oxygen free radicals. To assess the efficacy and safety of Ginkgo biloba for dementia or cognitive decline. The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS were searched on 20 September 2007 using the terms: ginkgo*, tanakan, EGB-761, EGB761, "EGB 761" and gingko*. The CDCIG Specialized Register contains records from all major health care databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS) as well as from many trials databases and grey literature sources. Randomized, double-blind studies, in which extracts of Ginkgo biloba at any strength and over any period were compared with placebo for their effects on people with acquired cognitive impairment, including dementia, of any degree of severity. Data were extracted from the published reports of the included studies, pooled where appropriate and the treatment effects or the risks and benefits estimated. 36 trials were included but most were small and of duration less than three months. Nine trials were of six months duration (2016 patients). These longer trials were the more recent trials and generally were of adequate size, and conducted to a reasonable standard. Most trials tested the same standardised preparation of Ginkgo biloba, EGb 761, at different doses, which are classified as high or low. The results from the more recent trials showed inconsistent results for cognition, activities of daily living, mood, depression and carer burden. Of the four most recent trials to report results three found no difference between Ginkgo biloba and placebo, and one found very large treatment effects in favour of Ginkgo biloba.There are no significant differences between Ginkgo biloba and placebo in the proportion of participants experiencing adverse events.A subgroup analysis including only patients diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease (925 patients from nine trials) also showed no consistent pattern of any benefit associated with Ginkgo biloba. Ginkgo biloba appears to be safe in use with no excess side effects compared with placebo. Many of the early trials used unsatisfactory methods, were small, and publication bias cannot be excluded. The evidence that Ginkgo biloba has predictable and clinically significant benefit for people with dementia or cognitive impairment is inconsistent and unreliable.

Melatonin for the treatment of dementia

Background There are a number of studies that suggest a relationship between decline of melatonin function and the symptoms of dementia. Objectives The review assessed the evidence of clinical effectiveness of melatonin in the treatment of symptoms of dementia. Relevant primary outcomes were cognition, mood, behaviour, functions of daily living, and safety of melatonin use and secondary outcomes were quality of life, morbidity, mortality and length of time to institutionalization and caregiver stress. Search methods The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS were searched on 29 June 2009 using the terms: MELATONIN and N-ACETYL-5-METHOXYTRYPTAMINE. The CDCIG Specialized Register contains records from all major health care databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS) as well as from many trials databases and grey literature sources. The search of June 2009 retrieved several studies for consideration by the authors. Selection criteria All relevant, randomized controlled trials in which orally administered melatonin in any dosage was compared with a control group for the effect on managing cognitive, behavioral (excluding sleep), and mood disturbances of people with dementia of any degree of severity. Data collection and analysis Two to three reviewers independently assessed the retrieved articles for relevance and risk of bias, and extracted data from the selected studies. Statistically significant differences in end-points or changes in outcomes from baseline to end of treatment between the melatonin and control groups were examined. Each study was summarized using a measure of effect (e.g. mean difference) and meta-analyses were conducted when appropriate. Main results Five studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled estimates of MMSE cognitive and ADAS-cognitive change scores from three of these studies revealed non-significant cognitive effects for melatonin treatment. In two of these studies, significant improvements in psychopathological behaviours (e.g., decreased mood symptoms of depression, anxiety and apathy and decreased behavior symptoms of hallucinations, delusions, agitation, irritability, and appetite disturbances), were found from meta-analysis of the change scores from the NPI (7 weeks, 2.5 mg melatonin), and ADAS non-cognitive (4 weeks, 3 mg melatonin) scales. Sensitivity analyses found similar results to those of the original meta-analyses, and thus, supported the effect estimates for non-significant cognitive outcomes. Individual study estimates for treatment effect of 2.5 mg melatonin at one year demonstrated a significant worsening of mood (e.g. decrease in positive affect) as measured by the Philadelphia Geriatric Centre Affect Rating Scale (positive). The remainder of the treatment effects for mood, behavior, and function of daily living were non-significant. There were no reported adverse effects associated with melatonin use. Authors' conclusions The analyses did not support the use of melatonin for treatment of cognitive impairment associated with dementia. Meta-analysis of psychopathologic behavior scale scores suggested that melatonin may be effective in treating these dementia-related disturbances.