Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cost-effectiveness of post-diagnosis treatment in dementia coordinated by multidisciplinary memory clinics in comparison to treatment coordinated by general practitioners: An example of a pragmatic trial

  • AD-Euro Study
  • Published:
JNHA - The Journal of Nutrition, Health and Aging

Abstract

Background

With the rising number of dementia patients with associated costs and the recognition that there is room for improvement in the provision of dementia care, the question arises on how to efficiently provide high quality dementia care.

Objective

To describe the design of a study to determine multidisciplinary memory clinics’ (MMC) effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in post-diagnosis treatment and care-coordination of dementia patients and their caregivers compared to the post-diagnosis treatment and care-coordination by general practitioners (GP). Next, this article provides the theoretical background of pragmatic trials, often needed in complex interventions, with the AD- Euro study as an example of such a pragmatic approach in a clinical trial.

Method

The study is a pragmatic multicentre, randomised clinical trial with an economic evaluation alongside, which aims to recruit 220 independently living patients with a new dementia diagnosis and their informal caregivers. After baseline measurements, patient and caregiver are allocated to the treatment arm MMC or GP and are visited for follow up measurements at 6 and 12 months. Primary outcome measures are Health Related Quality of Life of the patient as rated by the caregiver using the Quality of Life in Alzheimer’s Disease instrument (Qol-AD) and self-perceived caregiving burden of the informal caregiver measured using the Sense of Competence Questionnaire (SCQ). To establish cost-effectiveness a cost-utility analysis using utilities generated by the EuroQol instrument (EQ-5D) will be conducted from a societal perspective. Analyses will be done in an intention-to-treat fashion.

Results

The inclusion period started in January 2008 and will commence until at least December 2008. After finalising follow up the results of the study are expected to be available halfway through 2010.

Discussion

The study will provide an answer to whether follow-up of dementia patients can best be done in specialised outpatient memory clinics or in primary care settings with regard to quality and costs. It will enable decision making on how to provide good and efficient health care services in dementia.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00554047

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wimo A, Winblad B, Aguero-Torres H, Strauss E v. The magnitude of dementia occurrence in the world. Alzheimer Dis.Assoc.Disord. 2003; 17(2):63–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jönsson L, Berr C. Cost of dementia in Europe. Eur.J.Neurol. 2005; 12Suppl 150–53.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wimo A, Winblad B, Jönsson L. An estimate of the total worldwide societal costs of dementia in 2005. Alzheimer’s and Dementia 2007; 3:81–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fillit HM, Doody RS, Binaso K, Crooks GM, Ferris SH, Farlow MR, Leifer B, Mills C, Minkoff N, Orland B, Reichman WE, Salloway S. Recommendations for best practices in the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease in managed care. Am.J.Geriatr.Pharmacother. 2006; 4Suppl AS9–S24.

    Google Scholar 

  5. CBO richtlijn. Diagnostiek en medicamenteuze behandeling van dementie. Nederlandse Vereniging voor Klinische Geriatrie 2005. Van Zuiden Communications B.V., Alphen aan den Rijn (in Dutch).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Geldmacher DS, Provenzano G, McRae T, Mastey V, Ieni JR. Donepezil is associated with delayed nursing home placement in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. J.Am.Geriatr.Soc. 2003; 51(7):937–944.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Brodaty H, Green A, Koschera A. Meta-analysis of psychosocial interventions for caregivers of people with dementia. J.Am.Geriatr.Soc. 2003; 51(5):657–664.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Livingston G, Johnston K, Katona C, Paton J, Lyketsos CG. Systematic review of psychological approaches to the management of neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia. Am.J.Psychiatry 2005; 162(11):1996–2021.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mittelman MS, Ferris SH, Shulman E, Steinberg G, Levin B. A family intervention to delay nursing home placement of patients with Alzheimer disease. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1996; 276(21):1725–1731.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Spector A, Thorgrimsen L, Woods B, Royan L, Davies S, Butterworth M, Orrell M. Efficacy of an evidence-based cognitive stimulation therapy programme for people with dementia: randomised controlled trial. Br.J.Psychiatry 2003; 183:248–254.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Graff MJ, Adang EM, Vernooij-Dassen MJ, Dekker J, Jonsson L, Thijssen M, Hoefnagels WH, Olde Rikkert MGM. Community occupational therapy for older patients with dementia and their care givers: cost effectiveness study. BMJ 2008; 336(7636):134–138.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vernooij-Dassen M, Olde Rikkert MGM. Personal disease management in dementia care. Int.J.Geriatr.Psychiatry 2004; 19(8):715–717.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Geldmacher DS. Cost-effective recognition and diagnosis of dementia. Semin.Neurol. 2002; 22(1):63–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Crevel CH van, Gool WA van, Walstra GJ. Early diagnosis of dementia: which tests are indicated? What are their costs? J.Neurol. 1999; 246(2):73–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wolfs CA, Dirksen CD, Severens JL, Verhey FR. The added value of a multidisciplinary approach in diagnosing dementia: a review. Int.J.Geriatr.Psychiatry 2006; 21(3):223–232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Passmore AP, Craig DA. The future of memory clinics. Psychiatric Bulletin 2004; 28:375–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cody M, Beck C, Shue VM, Pope S. Reported practices of primary care physicians in the diagnosis and management of dementia. Aging Ment.Health 2002; 6(1):72–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Schwartz D, Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J.Chronic.Dis. 1967; 20(8):637–648.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. McMahon AD. Study control, violators, inclusion criteria and defining explanatory and pragmatic trials. Stat.Med. 2002; 21(10):1365–1376.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Roland M, Torgerson DJ. Understanding controlled trials: What are pragmatic trials? BMJ 1998; 316:285

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hotopf M. The pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Adv in Psych Treatment 2002; 8:326–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Morris JC. The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology 1993; 43(11):2412–2414.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Melis RJ, van Eijken MI, Teerenstra S, van Pugo AT, Parker SG, Borm GF, van de Lisdonk EH, Wensing M, Olde Rikkert MGM. A randomized study of a multidisciplinary program to intervene on geriatric syndromes in vulnerable older people who live at home (Dutch EASYcare Study). J.Gerontol.A Biol.Sci.Med.Sci. 2008; 63(3):283–290.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Oakley A, Strange V, Bonell C, Allen E, Stephenson J. Process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. BMJ 2006; 332(7538):413–416.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Godwin M, Ruhland L, Casson I, MacDonald S, Delva D, Birtwhistle R, Lam M, Seguin R. Pragmatic controlled clinical trials in primary care: the struggle between external and internal validity. BMC.Med.Res.Methodol. 2003; 3:28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Logsdon RG, Gibbons LE, McCurry SM, Teri L. Assessing quality of life in older adults with cognitive impairment. Psychosom.Med. 2002; 64(3):510–519.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Vernooij-Dassen MJ, Persoon JM, Felling AJ. Predictors of sense of competence in caregivers of demented persons. Soc.Sci.Med. 1996; 43(1):41–49.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Kaufer DI, Cummings JL, Ketchel P, Smith V, MacMillan A, Shelley T, Lopez OL, DeKosky ST. Validation of the NPI-Q, a brief clinical form of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory. J.Neuropsychiatry Clin.Neurosci. 2000; 12(2):233–239.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. de Jonghe JF, Kat MG, Kalisvaart CJ, Boelaarts L. [Neuropsychiatric inventory questionnaire (NPI-Q): A validity study of the Dutch form]. Tijdschr.Gerontol.Geriatr. 2003; 34(2):74–77.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Teunisse S, Derix MM. [Measurement of activities of daily living in patients with dementia living at home: development of a questionnaire]. Tijdschr.Gerontol.Geriatr. 1991; 22(2):53–59.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Radloff LS. The CES-D Scale: a Self-Report Depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement 1977; 1:385–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. Mini-Mental State - Practical Method for Grading Cognitive State of Patients for Clinician. Journal of psychiatric research 1975; 12(3):189–198.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Dubois B, Slachevsky A, Litvan I, Pillon B. The FAB: a Frontal Assessment Battery at bedside. Neurology 2000; 55(11):1621–1626.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Schmand B, de Bie RM, Koning-Haanstra M, de Smet JS, Speelman JD, van Zomeren AH. Unilateral pallidotomy in PD: a controlled study of cognitive and behavioral effects. The Netherlands Pallidotomy Study (NEPAS) group. Neurology 2000; 54(5):1058–1064.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Bowie CR, Harvey PD. Administration and interpretation of the Trail Making Test. Nat.Protoc. 2006; 1(5):2277–2281.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Sheikh JI, Yesavage JA. Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS): Recent evidence and development of a shorter version. Clinicla Gerontology 1986; 5:165–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Eysenck SB, Eysenck HJ. The questionnaire measurement of psychoticism. Psychol.Med. 1972; 2(1):50–55.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Pearlin LI, Schooler C. The structure of coping. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 1978; 19:2–21.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Spielberger CD, Gorsuch RL, Lushene RE. STAI Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Consulting Psychologists Press 1970.

  40. Brouwer WB, van Exel NJ, van Pugo GB, Redekop WK. The CarerQol instrument: a new instrument to measure care-related quality of life of informal caregivers for use in economic evaluations. Qual.Life Res. 2006; 15(6):1005–1021.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Dam van-Baggen CMJ, Huiskes CJAE, Kraaimaat FW. Inventarisatielijst Sociale Betrokkenheid: ISB (Inventory for Measuring Social Involvement). 1986. Academic Hospital Utrecht.

  42. Wimo A, Winblad B. Resourche Utilization in Dementia: RUD lite©. Brain Aging 2003; 3(1):48–59.

    Google Scholar 

  43. College voor zorgverzekeringen (CVZ). Richtlijnen voor farmaco-economisch onderzoek; evaluatie en actualisatie. 2005. (in Dutch).

  44. Oostenbrink JB, Bouwmans CAM, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FFH. Handleiding voor kostenonderzoek; Methoden en standaard kostprijzen voor economische evaluaties in de gezondheidszorg. Geactualiseerde versie 2004. 2004. College voor zorgverzekeringen (CVZ) (in Dutch).

  45. Selwood A, Thorgrimsen L, Orrell M. Quality of life in dementia—a one-year follow-up study. Int.J.Geriatr.Psychiatry 2005; 20(3):232–237.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Roland M, Torgerson D. Understanding controlled trials: what outcomes should be measured? BMJ 1998; 317(7165):1075

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Tunis SR, Stryer DB, Clancy CM. Practical clinical trials: increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. JAMA 2003; 290(12):1624–1632.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Rothwell PM. Factors that can affect the external validity of randomised controlled trials. PLoS.Clin.Trials 2006; 1(1):e9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Nederlands Huisartsen Genootschap. NHG-Standaard Dementie M21. 2003. http://nhg.artsennet.nl (in Dutch).

  50. Draskovic I, Vernooij-Dassen M, Verhey F, Scheltens P, Olde Rikkert MGM. Development of quality indicators for memory clinics. Int.J.Geriatr.Psychiatry 2008; 23(2):119–128.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dept of Geriatrics/Alzheimer Centre Nijmegen, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Els J. Meeuwsen, R. J. F. Melis, S. Vliek & M. G. M. Olde Rikkert

  2. Department of epidemiology, biostatistics and HTA, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    E. M. Adang & P. F. Krabbe

  3. Dept Geriatrics, Alysis Group/Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands

    G. A. Golüke-Willemse

  4. Dept of Geriatrics, Elkerliek Hospital, Helmond, The Netherlands

    B. J. De Leest

  5. centrum Land van Cuijk Boxmeer, GGZ Oost-Brabant, Boxmeer, The Netherlands

    F. H. J. M. Van Raak

  6. Memory Clinic Slingeland Hospital, Doetinchem/Alzheimer Centre Nijmegen, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    C. J. M. Schölzel-Dorenbos

  7. Dept of Neurology, VU Medical Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    M. C. Visser

  8. Dept of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    C. A. Wolfs

  9. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, internal code 925, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Els J. Meeuwsen

Authors
  1. Els J. Meeuwsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. J. F. Melis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. M. Adang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. G. A. Golüke-Willemse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. P. F. Krabbe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. B. J. De Leest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. F. H. J. M. Van Raak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. C. J. M. Schölzel-Dorenbos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. M. C. Visser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. C. A. Wolfs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. S. Vliek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. M. G. M. Olde Rikkert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Els J. Meeuwsen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Meeuwsen, E.J., Melis, R.J.F., Adang, E.M. et al. Cost-effectiveness of post-diagnosis treatment in dementia coordinated by multidisciplinary memory clinics in comparison to treatment coordinated by general practitioners: An example of a pragmatic trial. J Nutr Health Aging 13, 242–248 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-009-0066-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-009-0066-1

Key words

Search

Navigation