Home › Research › Clinical safety
Enhancing dementia care: a primary care-based memory clinic
Lee L, Hillier LM, Stolee P, Heckman G, Gagnon M, McAiney CA, Harvey D.. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2010-10-26
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Memory clinics have been promoted as opportunities for improving dementia diagnosis and care. This article describes the implementation of an interdisciplinary memory clinic within primary care in Ontario, Canada, that aims to provide timely access to comprehensive assessment and care and to improve referring physicians' knowledge of the management of dementia through collaborative care and practice-based mentorship. Between July 2006 and September 2009, 246 initial and follow-up assessments were conducted with 151 patients, a high proportion of whom received a new diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (44.4%) or dementia (19.2%). A trial of cholinesterase inhibitors was recommended for almost all patients newly diagnosed with dementia. Management interventions and recommendations included social worker outreach, long-term care planning, home safety or driving assessments, referral to community resources, and periodic follow-up and monitoring. A small proportion of patients (7.8%) were referred to a specialist. Surveyed patients and caregivers were very satisfied with their visit to the clinic. A chart audit conducted by two independent geriatricians indicated agreement with diagnosis and intervention, particularly related to use of specialists. The results indicate that memory clinics within primary care settings can support capacity building to ensure quality assessment and management of dementia at a primary care level.
Key findings
- The results indicate that memory clinics within primary care settings can support capacity building to ensure quality assessment and management of dementia at a primary care level.
Study details
- Participants151
- Effect size44.4%; 19.2%; 7.8%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 48/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of the American Geriatrics Society) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2010 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 151 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 20977435) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 28 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100. |
| Total | 48 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Lee, L., Hillier, L. M., Stolee, P., Heckman, G., Gagnon, M., McAiney, C. A., et al. (2010). Enhancing dementia care: a primary care-based memory clinic. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03130.x
Vancouver
Lee L, Hillier LM, Stolee P, Heckman G, Gagnon M, McAiney CA, et al. Enhancing dementia care: a primary care-based memory clinic. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2010. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03130.x. PMID: 20977435.
BibTeX
@article{lee2010-20977435,
author = {Lee, L. and Hillier, L. M. and Stolee, P. and Heckman, G. and Gagnon, M. and McAiney, C. A. and Harvey, D.},
title = {{Enhancing dementia care: a primary care-based memory clinic}},
journal = {Journal of the American Geriatrics Society},
year = {2010},
doi = {10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03130.x},
pmid = {20977435},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03130.x}
}