Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Comparing a Single Clinician Versus a Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference Approach for Dementia Diagnostics

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

DOI

  1. Causes of Death in People with Dementia from 2002 to 2015: A Nationwide Study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Dementia and COVID-19, a Bidirectional Liaison: Risk Factors, Biomarkers, and Optimal Health Care

    Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

  3. Is the Frontal Lobe the Primary Target of SARS-CoV-2?

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Alzheimer's disease related biomarkers in bipolar disorder - A longitudinal one-year case-control study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Feasibility of a culturally tailored dementia information program for minority ethnic communities in Denmark

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Hospital readmissions following infections in dementia: a nationwide and registry-based cohort study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based recommendations on the optimal evaluation approach for dementia diagnostics are limited. This impedes a harmonized workup across clinics and nations.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of a multidisciplinary consensus conference compared to a single clinician approach.

METHODS: In this prospective study, we enrolled 457 patients with suspected cognitive decline, from two European memory clinics. A diagnostic evaluation was performed at baseline independently in two ways: 1) by a single clinician and 2) at a multidisciplinary consensus conference. A syndrome diagnosis and an etiological diagnosis was made. The confidence in the diagnosis was recorded using a visual analogue scale. An expert panel re-evaluation diagnosis served as reference for the baseline syndrome diagnosis and a 12-24-month follow-up diagnosis for the etiological diagnosis.

RESULTS: 439 patients completed the study. We observed 12.5%discrepancy (k = 0.81) comparing the baseline syndrome diagnoses of the single clinician to the consensus conference, and 22.3%discrepancy (k = 0.68) for the baseline etiological diagnosis. The accuracy of the baseline etiological diagnosis was significantly higher at the consensus conference and was driven mainly by increased accuracy in the MCI group. Confidence in the etiological diagnosis at baseline was significantly higher at the consensus conference (p < 0.005), especially for the frontotemporal dementia diagnosis.

CONCLUSION: The multidisciplinary consensus conference performed better on diagnostic accuracy of disease etiology and increased clinicians' confidence. This highlights the importance of a multidisciplinary diagnostic evaluation approach for dementia diagnostics, especially when evaluating patients in the MCI stage.

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Alzheimer's Disease
Volume83
Issue number2
Pages (from-to)741-751
Number of pages11
ISSN1387-2877
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2021

ID: 68352579