Citations

A strong organizational culture begins with leadership who create systems and structures to support safety and well-being of staff. The purpose of this article is to provide direction for nursing leaders on resources and actionable items to support staff who have been involved in challenging encounters with patient behavior. Staff needs are impacted not only by the situation but also by available on-the-job support and leadership respect for staff’s individual judgment. Postsituation support from both leaders and peers offer a protective effect against negative outcomes from adverse experiences. Ultimately, staff preferences for specific resources are individual and best determined through private conversation with their leadership. Given the unique nature of each situation, taking into account patient intentions and staff perceptions, it is important to offer flexible and actionable measures for staff managing challenging patient behaviors.

Background Cardiovascular disease is linked to mental health conditions. Patients with cardiovascular disease and comorbid psychiatric illnesses such as major depressive disorder or generalized anxiety disorder often experience greater physical limitations and decreased overall health. Objective To determine if proactive psychiatric interventions improve staff satisfaction and patient outcomes, such as reducing length of stay and decreasing the 30-day readmission rate, for patients hospitalized on cardiac units with psychiatric comorbidities. Methods The implementation of a proactive psychiatric consultation-liaison service, which included proactive screening of psychiatric needs among patients hospitalized on cardiac units, targeted support for cardiovascular staff, and supportive interactions for patients. Results Comparison between preintervention and postintervention periods indicated a 21% reduction in the 30-day readmission rate for patients hospitalized on cardiac inpatient units with psychiatric comorbidities without adversely affecting hospital length of stay. Staff satisfaction significantly increased with the availability of psychiatric resources. Conclusion The implementation of a multi-disciplinary proactive psychiatric consultation-liaison service on inpatient cardiac units was associated with an increase in cardiovascular staff satisfaction with psychiatric services and a decrease in the 30-day readmission rate of patients with psychiatric comorbidities who were hospitalized for cardiovascular services without significantly affecting length of stay.

Abstract Background Staging disease severity in dementia research requires input from an informant. The Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDR) is the most used instrument for staging in Alzheimer's Disease (AD); but has been expanded to stage patients with frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) with the CDR PLUS NACC‐FTLD. An informant effect on the CDR has been reported in AD. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether informant characteristics influence the CDR PLUS NACC‐FTLD in a large cohort of participants with frontotemporal dementia (FTD). Method We included participants with a FTLD‐related syndrome from the ALLFTD study. We included participants with a CDR PLUS NACC‐FTLD higher than 0, information on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores, and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI‐Q). We performed a conditional growth model using multilevel linear regression analysis. We performed an exploratory stratified analysis by patient sex. Result We included 1411 participants, totalling 2063 visits. The patient's age at the initial visit was 64.7±9.4 years and 44.0% were females. Females were 69.2% of the informants, and the relationship was 79.1% spouse or partner, 10.6% children, 4.1% were siblings and 6.2% other. The CDR PLUS NACC‐FTLD scores were affected by informant characteristics. The CDR PLUS NACC‐FTLD scores were 0.41 (CI 95%:0.08 to 0.75) higher with female informants. The frequency of visits was associated with a CDR PLUS NACC‐FTLD score 0.86 higher (CI 95%:0.17 to 0.56) when visiting at least once a week, 1.46 higher (CI 95%:0.46 to 2.47) when visiting daily, and 0.83 higher (CI 95%:0.06 to 1.60) when living with the patient compared with visiting less than once a week. As expected, CDR‐FLTD scores increased with lower MoCA and higher NPI‐Q scores. In the stratified analysis by sex, we found that female informant was associated with higher CDR PLUS NACC‐FTLD scores only when patients were male. Conclusion We found that the CDR PLUS NACC‐FTLD is influenced by informant sex and frequency of visits in patients with FTLD‐related syndromes. These results are similar to those observed in AD patients and underscore the need to recognize that informant characteristics may impact dementia severity scales.

AbstractBackgroundThe three most common genes responsible for the familial Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (f‐FTLD) are MAPT, GRN, and C9orf72, with the C9orf72 mutation being the most common cause of f‐FTLD. The ALLFTD Consortium targets to characterize f‐FTLD, including its preclinical stage, to prepare for clinical trials in FTLD. We sought to investigate the initial symptoms and clinical picture of f‐FTLD and compare them among the common pathogenic genes using longitudinal CDR® plus NACC FTLD.MethodWe longitudinally assessed the CDR® plus NACC FTLD among 292 asymptomatic participants of the ALLFTD Consortium who are family members of f‐FTLD caused by MAPT (n = 99), GRN (n = 67), or C9orf72 (n = 126) mutations, and described the detailed profiles of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD in the participants who developed Mild Behavioral and/or Cognitive Impairment (MBCI).ResultForty‐one participants (17 MAPT, 11 GRN, 13 C9orf72) developed MBCI during follow‐up visits . Age at the diagnosis of MBCI was 52.3±13.0 years (GRN 63.2±11.8, MAPT 43.5±8.6, C9orf72 54.7±10.7). Frequencies of abnormal rating on the eight CDR® plus NACC FTLD domains at the time of MBCI diagnosis were: “Memory” 44% (MAPT 47%, GRN 55%, C9orf72 31%); “Orientation” 7% (MAPT 6%, GRN 9%, C9orf72 8%); “Judgment and Problem Solving” 39% (MAPT 41%, GRN 55%, C9orf72 23%); “Community Affairs” 22% (MAPT 24%, GRN 18%, C9orf72 23%); “Home and Hobbies” 22% (MAPT 35%, GRN 0%, C9orf72 23%); “Personal Care” 0%; “Behavior/Comportment/Personality” 51% (MAPT 59%, GRN 55%, C9orf72 38%); “Language” 29% (MAPT 18%, GRN 55%, C9orf72 23%).ConclusionInitial symptoms and clinical picture of f‐FTLD in MBCI stage differ among responsible FTLD genes, which could be useful in detecting very early features of f‐FTLD in pathogenic mutation carriers.

AbstractIntroductionThe CDR Dementia Staging Instrument PLUS National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (CDR plus NACC FTLD) was developed by adding to the standard CDR two extra domains focused on the main features of frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD): language and behavior/personality. We intended to perform the validation studies for the European‐Portuguese population.MethodsA total of 105 participants matched for age, education, and disease staging (35 bvFTD, 35 AD, and 35 controls) were included. A translated‐version of the CDR and the two added domains was administered by a neuropsychologist who was blinded to the diagnosis.ResultsThe bvFTD group had higher baseline CDR plus NACC FTLD scores compared to the AD and controls. Only the sum‐of‐boxes (SB) score, the behavior/personality, and language domains were able to distinguish between clinical groups. Logistic regression analyses showed that adding the behavior/personality domain with or without language significantly enhanced the discriminating ability.DiscussionResults show that the CDR plus NACC FTLD is a reliable tool in the diagnostic process of bvFTD patients and has an added value in distinguishing them from patients with AD.

AbstractBackgroundClinicopathologic studies reported that the NACC Uniform Dataset (UDS) 2.0 core measures do not adequately differentiate patients who ultimately died of Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (FTLD) from Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The FTLD Module (FTLD‐MOD) assesses core features of behavioral variant FTD (bvFTD) and primary progressive aphasia (PPA). Initial investigations suggest that the FTLD‐MOD improves discrimination between biomarker‐supported bvFTD and typical late‐onset AD, and that clinically diagnosed PPA participants performed worse than bvFTD on all FTLD‐MOD language tasks. However, the utility of these measures in the differential diagnosis of AD vs. major FTLD syndromes in young‐onset cases remains underexplored.MethodWe examined participants with age‐of‐onset < 65 years in the ARTFL‐LEFFTDS Longitudinal Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ALLFTD) consortium and the Longitudinal Early Onset AD Study (LEADS). 115 bvFTD, 53 semantic variant PPA (svPPA), 29 non‐fluent variant PPA (nfvPPA) and 124 early‐onset AD (eoAD) cases completed the UDS3 and FLTD‐MOD. Linear regression analyses measured group differences in FLTD‐MOD raw scores and UDS3 neuropsychological z‐scores after accounting for group differences in demographic variables and global severity ratings. Alpha was 0.05 with Bonferroni corrections.ResultsParticipants with eoAD demonstrated the most impaired scores on tasks of attention, working memory, and processing speed, including Digit Span Backward (z=‐1.87) and Trails A (z=‐3.82). They also demonstrated difficulty on FTLD‐MOD language tasks with a working memory requirement (sentence repetition raw=3.68/5) and, as expected, memory (story delayed recall z=‐2.4z). svPPA performed the worst on FTLD‐MOD and UDS3 tasks assessing semantic memory, especially naming (all p’s ≤ 0.03). nfvPPA performed worst on sentence reading, sentence repetition, and letter fluency (all p’s ≤ 0.02). Consistent with previous work, these measures differentiate between bvFTD and PPA variants. However, relative to eoAD, bvFTD was equivalent (Trails B: bvFTDz=‐3.8, eoADz=‐3.82; p=0.12) or outperformed (sentence repetition: bvFTD=4.22/5, eoAD=3.68/5; p<0.001) the eoAD group on all tasks.ConclusionsWe undertook this analysis to compare performance of the major young‐onset sporadic AD and FTLD clinical syndromes in the ALLFTD and LEADS studies. Results demonstrate relatively distinct cognitive profiles among eoAD, svPPA, and nfvPPA, but not in bvFTD. Future analyses will include FTLD‐MOD behavioral symptom questionnaires to assess their utility in differentiating bvFTD.

AbstractIntroductionWe created global rating scoring rules for the CDR® plus NACC FTLD to detect and track early frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and to conduct clinical trials in FTLD.MethodsThe CDR plus NACC FTLD rating was applied to 970 sporadic and familial participants from the baseline visit of Advancing Research and Treatment in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ARTFL)/Longitudinal Evaluation of Familial Frontotemporal Dementia Subjects (LEFFTDS). Each of the eight domains of the CDR plus NACC FTLD was equally weighed in determining the global score. An interrater reliability study was completed for 40 participants.ResultsThe CDR plus NACC FTLD showed very good interrater reliability. It was especially useful in detecting clinical features of mild non‐fluent/agrammatic variant primary progressive aphasia participants.DiscussionThe global CDR plus NACC FTLD score could be an attractive outcome measure for clinical trials in symptomatic FTLD, and may be useful in natural history studies and clinical trials in FTLD spectrum disorders.