Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

The process of disclosing a diagnosis of dementia and mild cognitive impairment: A national survey of specialist physicians in Denmark

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Nielsen, T Rune ; Svensson, Birthe Hjorth ; Rohr, Gitte ; Gottrup, Hanne ; Vestergaard, Karsten ; Høgh, Peter ; Waldemar, Gunhild. / The process of disclosing a diagnosis of dementia and mild cognitive impairment : A national survey of specialist physicians in Denmark. I: Dementia. 2020 ; Bind 19, Nr. 3. s. 547-559.

Bibtex

@article{77411de6d2a2419eae5880672636e70f,
title = "The process of disclosing a diagnosis of dementia and mild cognitive impairment: A national survey of specialist physicians in Denmark",
abstract = "Background Although general recommendations for diagnostic disclosure of dementia are available, little is known about how these recommendations are implemented. The aim of the current study was to investigate the process and content of dementia diagnostic disclosure meetings, and to compare key aspects of disclosing a diagnosis of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. Method A total of 54 specialist physicians in Danish dementia diagnostic departments completed an online survey on their practices regarding diagnostic disclosure of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. The influence of respondent characteristics was assessed, and differences on key aspects of disclosing a diagnosis of dementia and mild cognitive impairment were analyzed. Results The results suggest that among Danish specialist physicians, there is a general consensus regarding the organization of diagnostic disclosure meetings. However, differences in employed terminology and information provided when disclosing a dementia diagnosis were evident. Significant differences were present on key aspects of the diagnostic disclosure of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. For instance, 91{\%} would use the term dementia during diagnostic disclosures compared to just 72{\%} for mild cognitive impairment. Conclusion The range of practices reflected in the present study confirms the complexity of diagnostic disclosure and highlights the importance of preparation and follow-up strategies to tailor the disclosure process to the needs of individual patients with dementia and their caregivers. Due to earlier diagnosis of neurodegenerative disorders, more research is urgently needed on this aspect of the diagnostic process, especially to develop evidence-based models for the disclosure of mild cognitive impairment.",
keywords = "Alzheimer’s disease, dementia, diagnosis and classification, disclosure, mild cognitive impairment",
author = "Nielsen, {T Rune} and Svensson, {Birthe Hjorth} and Gitte Rohr and Hanne Gottrup and Karsten Vestergaard and Peter H{\o}gh and Gunhild Waldemar",
year = "2020",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1177/1471301218777443",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "547--559",
journal = "Dementia",
issn = "1471-3012",
publisher = "Sage Publications Ltd",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The process of disclosing a diagnosis of dementia and mild cognitive impairment

T2 - A national survey of specialist physicians in Denmark

AU - Nielsen, T Rune

AU - Svensson, Birthe Hjorth

AU - Rohr, Gitte

AU - Gottrup, Hanne

AU - Vestergaard, Karsten

AU - Høgh, Peter

AU - Waldemar, Gunhild

PY - 2020/4

Y1 - 2020/4

N2 - Background Although general recommendations for diagnostic disclosure of dementia are available, little is known about how these recommendations are implemented. The aim of the current study was to investigate the process and content of dementia diagnostic disclosure meetings, and to compare key aspects of disclosing a diagnosis of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. Method A total of 54 specialist physicians in Danish dementia diagnostic departments completed an online survey on their practices regarding diagnostic disclosure of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. The influence of respondent characteristics was assessed, and differences on key aspects of disclosing a diagnosis of dementia and mild cognitive impairment were analyzed. Results The results suggest that among Danish specialist physicians, there is a general consensus regarding the organization of diagnostic disclosure meetings. However, differences in employed terminology and information provided when disclosing a dementia diagnosis were evident. Significant differences were present on key aspects of the diagnostic disclosure of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. For instance, 91% would use the term dementia during diagnostic disclosures compared to just 72% for mild cognitive impairment. Conclusion The range of practices reflected in the present study confirms the complexity of diagnostic disclosure and highlights the importance of preparation and follow-up strategies to tailor the disclosure process to the needs of individual patients with dementia and their caregivers. Due to earlier diagnosis of neurodegenerative disorders, more research is urgently needed on this aspect of the diagnostic process, especially to develop evidence-based models for the disclosure of mild cognitive impairment.

AB - Background Although general recommendations for diagnostic disclosure of dementia are available, little is known about how these recommendations are implemented. The aim of the current study was to investigate the process and content of dementia diagnostic disclosure meetings, and to compare key aspects of disclosing a diagnosis of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. Method A total of 54 specialist physicians in Danish dementia diagnostic departments completed an online survey on their practices regarding diagnostic disclosure of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. The influence of respondent characteristics was assessed, and differences on key aspects of disclosing a diagnosis of dementia and mild cognitive impairment were analyzed. Results The results suggest that among Danish specialist physicians, there is a general consensus regarding the organization of diagnostic disclosure meetings. However, differences in employed terminology and information provided when disclosing a dementia diagnosis were evident. Significant differences were present on key aspects of the diagnostic disclosure of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. For instance, 91% would use the term dementia during diagnostic disclosures compared to just 72% for mild cognitive impairment. Conclusion The range of practices reflected in the present study confirms the complexity of diagnostic disclosure and highlights the importance of preparation and follow-up strategies to tailor the disclosure process to the needs of individual patients with dementia and their caregivers. Due to earlier diagnosis of neurodegenerative disorders, more research is urgently needed on this aspect of the diagnostic process, especially to develop evidence-based models for the disclosure of mild cognitive impairment.

KW - Alzheimer’s disease

KW - dementia

KW - diagnosis and classification

KW - disclosure

KW - mild cognitive impairment

U2 - 10.1177/1471301218777443

DO - 10.1177/1471301218777443

M3 - Journal article

VL - 19

SP - 547

EP - 559

JO - Dementia

JF - Dementia

SN - 1471-3012

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 55088509