Citations

AbstractBackgroundSelf‐administered cognitive assessments demonstrate usability and ability to detect cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease, but usability in other neurodegenerative diseases is understudied. We investigated whether Mayo Test Drive (MTD), a self‐administered multi‐device compatible cognitive assessment platform, demonstrates usability and correlation with traditional neuropsychological tests in a pilot study of individuals with progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP).MethodEleven individuals with PSP (mean age = 69.6±7.2 years; mean education = 15.3±2.7 years; 72.7% male; 90.9% white; PSP Rating Scale [PSPRS] = 32.4±15.5) enrolled in a Neurodegenerative Research Group study at Mayo Clinic participated. Participants completed neurological evaluation, traditional neuropsychological assessment, in‐person self‐administered MTD comprised of the Stricker Learning Span and Symbols Test, and a MTD usability questionnaire with quantitative and qualitative questions. Participants received diagnoses of PSP clinical variants per Movement Disorders Society‐PSP criteria. Seven participants had PSP‐Richardson, two had PSP‐postural instability, and two had PSP‐parkinsonism. We used descriptive analyses to examine usability questions, qualitative analyses for free text responses, and Spearman correlations to analyze associations between MTD and traditional tests of global cognition and five cognitive domains.ResultTen of eleven patients completed MTD (average completion time [minutes] = 22.2±6.5). Study staff terminated one participant’s session early due to an appointment conflict; we excluded this participant from analyses. Six participants completed MTD with tablets and four used smartphones. Participants reported high ease completing MTD (9.00±1.76 on 0‐10 scale) and comfortability using their devices (9.40±1.58). All participants reported they could complete MTD independently, with one participant indicating need for assistance with hyperlinks and three reporting need for assistance with QR codes. Qualitative data suggested three participants had motoric difficulty using the tablets; these individuals had the greatest PSPRS symptom severity, although MTD performance was not correlated with the PSPRS (rho = ‐.122; p>.05). MTD performance significantly correlated with the MoCA (rho = 0.88) and tests of attention, executive, and visuospatial function (Table).ConclusionIn a MTD usability pilot for participants with PSP, participants reported high ease and comfort completing MTD independently; those with greater motor symptoms had more difficulty navigating technology. Additionally, performances on MTD were correlated with the MoCA and other in‐person assessments, demonstrating convergent validity.

ABSTRACTPurposeDouble‐level osteotomies (DLOs) have shown promising results for knee joint preservation, however, most ultimately progress in terms of degenerative disease resulting in conversion to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the time to TKA conversion, long‐term clinical outcomes and revision rates of patients who have undergone TKA after prior ipsilateral DLO.MethodsPatients who underwent simultaneous or staged DLO and subsequently underwent conversion to TKA at a single academic institution from 1997 to 2022 were evaluated. The type of osteotomy performed (opening‐ vs. closing‐wedge), osteotomy hardware fixation, when and if osteotomy hardware was removed, implanted TKA components and revision rates were recorded. Postoperative outcomes, including Forgotten Joint Score‐12 (FJS‐12), Tegner Activity Scale score and subjective knee preference were also obtained.ResultsA total of 22 patients (24 knees) underwent TKA following DLO and were followed for an average of 26.1 ± 7.7 years. The average time from DLO to TKA conversion was 14.1 ± 6.5 years, with 70.8% of knees converting to TKA more than 10 years after DLO. The mean follow‐up after conversion to TKA was 12.0 ± 7.7 years. Only 12.5% of patients received a varus‐valgus or hinged‐constrained TKA. At the final follow‐up, the mean FJS‐12 was 75.8 ± 23.1, while the mean Tegner Activity Scale score was 2.5 ± 1.1. Seventy‐seven percent of patients had no subjective knee preference or preferred their DLO‐TKA knee. Only two knees (7.4%) underwent subsequent revision after index arthroplasty at a mean of 9.3 years postoperatively.ConclusionsA majority of DLOs (70.8%) converted to TKA after more than a decade. Subsequent TKA function was favorable as most patients had either no subjective knee preference or preferred their DLO‐TKA knee. This study demonstrates both long‐term joint preservation and uncompromised TKA function after prior DLO.Level of EvidenceLevel IV.

AbstractBackgroundThe Uniform Data Set (UDS) neuropsychological battery, administered across Alzheimer’s Disease Centers (ADC), includes memory tests but lacks a list‐learning paradigm. ADCs often supplement the UDS with their own preferred list‐learning task. Given the importance of list‐learning for characterizing memory, we aimed to develop a harmonized memory score that incorporates UDS memory tests while allowing centers to contribute differing list‐learning tasks.MethodWe applied item‐banking confirmatory factor analysis to develop a composite memory score in 5,287 participants (mean age 67.1; SD = 12.2) recruited through 18 ADCs and four consortia (DiverseVCID, MarkVCID, ALLFTD, LEADS) who completed UDS memory tasks (used as linking‐items) and one of five list‐learning tasks. All analyses used linear regression. We tested whether memory scores were affected by which list‐learning task was administered. To assess construct validity, we tested associations of memory scores with demographics, disease severity (CDR Box Score), an independent memory task (TabCAT Favorites, n = 675), and hippocampal volume (n = 811). We compared performances between cognitively unimpaired (n = 279), AD‐biomarker+ MCI (n = 26), and AD‐biomarker+ dementia (n = 98). In a subsample with amyloid‐ and tau‐PET (n = 49), we compared memory scores from participants with positive vs negative scans determined using established quantitative cutoffs.ResultModel fit indices were excellent (e.g., CFI = 0.998) and factor loadings were strong (0.43‐0.93). Differences in list‐learning task had a negligible effect on scores (average Cohen’s d = 0.11). Higher memory scores were significantly (p’s<.001) correlated with younger age (β = ‐0.18), lower CDR Box Scores (β = ‐0.63), female sex (β = 0.12), higher education (β = 0.19), larger hippocampal volume (β = 0.42), and an independent memory task (β = 0.71, p<0.001). The memory composite declined in a stepwise fashion by diagnosis (cognitively unimpaired>MCI>AD dementia, p<0.001). On average, amyloid‐PET positivity was associated with lower composite scores, but was not statistically significant (β = ‐0.34; p = 0.25; d = 0.40). Tau‐PET positivity was associated with worse performance, demonstrating a large effect size (β = ‐0.75; p<0.002; d = 0.91).ConclusionThe harmonized memory score developed in a large national sample was stable regardless of contributing list‐learning task and its validity for cross‐cohort ADRD research is supported by expected associations with demographics, clinical measures, and Alzheimer’s biomarkers. A processing script will be made available to enhance cross‐cohort ADRD research.

AbstractBackgroundFrontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a diverse spectrum of neurodegenerative disorders impacting the frontal and temporal lobes, primarily manifesting as behavioral and/or language issues. Accurate diagnosis is crucial for effective management, potential treatment, and care planning. While speech analysis has shown promise in detecting cognitive markers of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), its exploration in FTD is limited. This study examined if linguistic features from remote, app‐based speech collection can differentiate healthy controls (HC) from individuals with behavioral variant FTD (bvFTD), the most common FTD variant.MethodParticipants included 15 bvFTD (mean age = 64.3, SD = 9.1 years) and 19 HC (mean = 55.8, SD = 14.2) from the ALLFTD Consortium. Participants were prompted to talk freely about a happy memory; audio recordings were collected with the ALLFTD Mobile App, transcribed using OpenAI’s large Whisper model, and manually quality‐checked. We extracted 98 linguistic features using our in‐house pipeline (Fig 1). Features were selected for classification analysis if they differed between groups based on a MANCOVA adjusted for age, sex/gender, and education, with feature reduction in case of collinearity. We then determined if these features could classify groups using multi‐variable logistic regression models, and subsequently calculated its ROC‐AUC score to measure sensitivity/specificity.ResultBased on the MANCOVA, three features were selected for classification analysis: average seconds of non‐speech (i.e., silence), ratio of number of complex nominal clauses to total clauses, and number of restarts (i.e., disfluency). The logistic model showed that this set could distinguish between groups (Omnibus p = .001; Nagelkerke R2 = .499), and their saved prediction probabilities indicated a ROC‐AUC score of 84.8% accuracy (Fig 2).ConclusionLeveraging a flexible speech capture app with remote accessibility and state‐of‐the‐art automated speech analysis, we identified linguistic features that can distinguish HC from bvFTD. This approach presents a promising screening tool for detecting bvFTD, offering quick, easily administered assessments with the potential for scalable implementation outside of clinical settings. Next steps are to investigate linguistic changes in presymptomatic mutation carriers and compare speech profiles between FTD and AD. These results hold meaningful implications for addressing current challenges in FTD therapeutics, potentially offering sensitive outcome measures for clinical trials and future tools for personalized cognitive assessment and long‐term monitoring.

AbstractBackgroundSelf‐administered cognitive assessments demonstrate usability and ability to detect cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease, but usability in other neurodegenerative diseases is understudied. We investigated whether Mayo Test Drive (MTD), a self‐administered multi‐device compatible cognitive assessment platform, demonstrates usability and correlation with traditional neuropsychological tests in a pilot study of individuals with progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP).MethodEleven individuals with PSP (mean age = 69.6±7.2 years; mean education = 15.3±2.7 years; 72.7% male; 90.9% white; PSP Rating Scale [PSPRS] = 32.4±15.5) enrolled in a Neurodegenerative Research Group study at Mayo Clinic participated. Participants completed neurological evaluation, traditional neuropsychological assessment, in‐person self‐administered MTD comprised of the Stricker Learning Span and Symbols Test, and a MTD usability questionnaire with quantitative and qualitative questions. Participants received diagnoses of PSP clinical variants per Movement Disorders Society‐PSP criteria. Seven participants had PSP‐Richardson, two had PSP‐postural instability, and two had PSP‐parkinsonism. We used descriptive analyses to examine usability questions, qualitative analyses for free text responses, and Spearman correlations to analyze associations between MTD and traditional tests of global cognition and five cognitive domains.ResultTen of eleven patients completed MTD (average completion time [minutes] = 22.2±6.5). Study staff terminated one participant’s session early due to an appointment conflict; we excluded this participant from analyses. Six participants completed MTD with tablets and four used smartphones. Participants reported high ease completing MTD (9.00±1.76 on 0‐10 scale) and comfortability using their devices (9.40±1.58). All participants reported they could complete MTD independently, with one participant indicating need for assistance with hyperlinks and three reporting need for assistance with QR codes. Qualitative data suggested three participants had motoric difficulty using the tablets; these individuals had the greatest PSPRS symptom severity, although MTD performance was not correlated with the PSPRS (rho = ‐.122; p>.05). MTD performance significantly correlated with the MoCA (rho = 0.88) and tests of attention, executive, and visuospatial function (Table).ConclusionIn a MTD usability pilot for participants with PSP, participants reported high ease and comfort completing MTD independently; those with greater motor symptoms had more difficulty navigating technology. Additionally, performances on MTD were correlated with the MoCA and other in‐person assessments, demonstrating convergent validity.

Background: Previous research has reported higher rates of both injury and illness among Paralympic athletes compared with Olympic athletes during the Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games, but no studies have directly compared injury and illness incidence between Olympic and Paralympic athletes competing in a Summer Games. Purpose: To compare injury and illness rates between Olympic and Paralympic Team USA athletes competing in the Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: All injuries and illnesses that occurred among the Team USA athletes competing in the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympic or Paralympic Games were documented. A total of 701 Team USA athletes (53.6% female) competed in the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympic Games, across 34 different sports. For the Tokyo 2020 Summer Paralympic Games, a total of 245 athletes (51.6% female) competed across 20 sports. Incidence rates (IRs) per 1000 athlete-days were calculated according to sex, sport, anatomic location, and illness type. IR ratios (IRRs) were calculated to compare IRs between male and female athletes and between Olympic and Paralympic athletes. Results: Overall, there were no differences in injury incidence (IRR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.84-1.68) or illness incidence (IRR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.41-1.15) between Olympic and Paralympic athletes. Male Paralympic athletes were less likely to sustain an illness compared with female Paralympic athletes (IRR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.11-0.90). Conclusion: There were no differences in injury or illness rates between Olympic and Paralympic Team USA athletes competing at the Tokyo 2020 Summer Games, contrary to previous comparisons among winter sport athletes. These results challenge the prevailing notion that Summer Paralympic athletes are at greater injury and illness risk, suggesting that factors beyond Olympic or Paralympic Games participation influence health concerns.

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. Through a modified‐Delphi approach and guideline‐development process (7374 publications were reviewed; 133 met inclusion criteria) an expert workgroup developed recommendations as steps in a patient‐centered evaluation process. This summary focuses on recommendations, appropriate for any practice setting, forming core elements of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes specialist recommendations. If clinicians use this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings. Highlights US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. This summary focuses on recommendations, appropriate for any practice setting, forming core elements of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes specialist recommendations. If clinicians use this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings.

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or a related dementia (ADRD) are two decades old. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. An expert workgroup conducted a review of 7374 publications (133 met inclusion criteria) and developed recommendations as steps in an evaluation process. This summary briefly reviews core recommendations and details specialist recommendations of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes primary care recommendations. If clinicians use the recommendations in this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings. Highlights US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. This summary focuses on recommendations appropriate for specialty practice settings, forming key elements of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes primary care recommendations. If clinicians use this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings.

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's Disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. As part of the modified Delphi approach and guideline development process (7374 publications were reviewed; 133 met inclusion criteria) an expert workgroup developed recommendations as steps in a patient‐centered evaluation process. The workgroup provided a summary of validated instruments to measure symptoms in daily life (including cognition, mood and behavior, and daily function) and to test for signs of cognitive impairment in the office. This article distills this information to provide a resource to support clinicians in the implementation of this approach in clinical practice. The companion articles provide context for primary care and specialty clinicians with regard to how to fit these instruments into the workflow and actions to take when integration of performance on these instruments with clinical profile and clinician judgment support potential cognitive impairment.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Psychotropic medication (PM) use in behavioral‐variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is higher than in other dementias. However, no information exists on whether PM use differs between sporadic and genetic bvFTD. METHODS We analyzed data from sporadic and genetic bvFTD participants with PM prescriptions in the Advancing Research and Treatment in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration/Longitudinal Evaluation of Familial Frontotemporal Dementia Subjects study. We estimated ordinal odds ratio (OOR) of having more PM comparing sporadic and genetic bvFTD. Finally, we explored the neuropsychiatric symptom (NPS) combinations using classification and regression trees (CART). RESULTS We included 263 with sporadic and 193 with genetic bvFTD. The OOR for sporadic bvFTD to be on PM was 1.75 (95% confidence interval: 1.21 to 2.53) for the fully adjusted model. CART revealed the most common NPS combination was apathy + personality changes in 18% of participants. DISCUSSION Participants with sporadic bvFTD were twice as likely to be on PM compared to genetic bvFTD. The reason for increased PM usage in sporadic bvFTD participants should be further investigated. Highlights We report on patients with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). We evaluated the psychotropic medication (PM) prescription at baseline in the cohort. Patients with sporadic bvFTD had more prescriptions for PM than genetic patients. The frequency of symptoms combination was different in sporadic and genetic bvFTD.