A core element of the Strengthening Responses to Dementia in Developing Countries (STRiDE) programme was to generate novel data on the prevalence, cost and impact of dementia in low- and middle-income countries, to build better health policy. Indonesia and South Africa are two middle-income countries in need of such data.

To present the STRiDE methodology and generate estimates of dementia prevalence in Indonesia and South Africa.

We conducted community-based, single-phase, cross-sectional studies in Indonesia and South Africa, randomly sampling participants aged 65 years or older in each country. Dementia prevalence rates for each country were generated by using the 10/66 short schedule and applying its diagnostic algorithm. Weighted estimates were calculated with national sociodemographic data.

Data were collected between September and December 2021 in 2110 people in Indonesia and 408 people in South Africa. The adjusted weighted dementia prevalence was 27.9% (95% CI 25.2–28.9) in Indonesia and 12.5% (95% CI 9.5–16.0) in South Africa. Our results indicate that there could be >4.2 million people in Indonesia and >450 000 people in South Africa who have dementia. Only five participants (0.2%) in Indonesia and two (0.5%) in South Africa had been previously diagnosed with dementia.

Despite prevalence estimates being high, formal diagnosis rates of dementia were very low across both countries (<1%). Further STRiDE investigations will provide indications of the impact and costs of dementia in these countries, but our results provide evidence that dementia needs to be prioritised within national health and social care policy agendas.

To examine the costs and cost-effectiveness of mirtazapine compared to placebo over 12-week follow-up.

Economic evaluation in a double-blind randomized controlled trial of mirtazapine vs. placebo.

Community settings and care homes in 26 UK centers.

People with probable or possible Alzheimer’s disease and agitation.

Primary outcome included incremental cost of participants’ health and social care per 6-point difference in CMAI score at 12 weeks. Secondary cost-utility analyses examined participants’ and unpaid carers’ gain in quality-adjusted life years (derived from EQ-5D-5L, DEMQOL-Proxy-U, and DEMQOL-U) from the health and social care and societal perspectives.

One hundred and two participants were allocated to each group; 81 mirtazapine and 90 placebo participants completed a 12-week assessment (87 and 95, respectively, completed a 6-week assessment). Mirtazapine and placebo groups did not differ on mean CMAI scores or health and social care costs over the study period, before or after adjustment for center and living arrangement (independent living/care home). On the primary outcome, neither mirtazapine nor placebo could be considered a cost-effective strategy with a high level of confidence. Groups did not differ in terms of participant self- or proxy-rated or carer self-rated quality of life scores, health and social care or societal costs, before or after adjustment.

On cost-effectiveness grounds, the use of mirtazapine cannot be recommended for agitated behaviors in people living with dementia. Effective and cost-effective medications for agitation in dementia remain to be identified in cases where non-pharmacological strategies for managing agitation have been unsuccessful.

This study aimed to explore factors that positively influence UK medical students’ interest in psychiatry. Delegates and committee members of the National Student Psychiatry Conference 2018 were invited to participate in individual semi-structured interviews. Nine interviews were conducted. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Four core themes emerged: psychiatry education and exposure, role of a psychiatrist, fitting in, and factors external to medical school. All students had some degree of interest in mental health before medical school, but placement and extra-curricular factors were strongly influential.

Interest in psychiatry may be promoted by facilitating student exposure to enthusiastic psychiatrists and psychiatry subspecialties, encouraging extra-curricular activities and identifying early those with pre-existing interest in mental health on admission to medical school. Aspects of psychiatry that should be promoted include the potential to make a positive difference to patients’ lives and the teamworking elements of the specialty.

Over 400,000 people live in care home settings in the UK. One way of understanding and improving the quality of care provided is by measuring and understanding the quality of life (QoL) of those living in care homes. This review aimed to identify and examine the psychometric properties including feasibility of use of dementia-specific QoL measures developed or validated for use in care settings.

Systematic review.

Instruments were identified using four electronic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and CINAHL) and lateral search techniques. Searches were conducted in January 2017. Studies which reported on the development and/or validation of dementia specific QoL instruments for use in care settings written in English were eligible for inclusion. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. Feasibility was assessed using a checklist developed specifically for the review.

Six hundred and sixteen articles were identified in the initial search. After de-duplication, screening and further lateral searches were performed, 25 studies reporting on 9 dementia-specific QoL instruments for use in care home settings were included in the review. Limited evidence was available on the psychometric properties of many instruments identified. Higher-quality instruments were not easily accessible or had low feasibility of use.

Few high-quality instruments of QoL validated for use in care home settings are readily or freely available. This review highlights the need to develop a well-validated measure of QoL for use within care homes that is also feasible and accessible.

There is a need to improve dementia education to prepare future generations of healthcare professionals to deal with the increasing challenges they will face. Time for Dementia is an innovative undergraduate education program for medical, nursing, and paramedic students in the south of England. Success of the program is dependent upon the participation of families (people with dementia and their carers). This qualitative study seeks to explore the motivation and experiences of the families taking part in the program.

A topic guide was developed to understand factors influencing motivation and retention. A purposeful sample of participant families, who had at least 12 months of involvement in the program, were selected from a cohort of 282 families and were invited to take part in an in-depth qualitative interview. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis. This was subsequently refined in an on-going process of analysis aided by the use of Nvivo 11. Interviewing stopped when thematic saturation was reached.

Eighteen families took part in an in-depth qualitative interviews. Four themes were identified from the analysis. These themes were motivators, value to family, value to the person with dementia, and student factors.

This study identifies underpinning factors that motivate families to join dementia education programs and the impact of such programs upon them. We found that engagement in such programs can have therapeutic benefits to participants, and do not cause harm. These findings can be used to strengthen recruitment and enhance family involvement in similar programs.

One common finding in analyses of health systems with respect to dementia is that there is a “diagnosis gap” in dementia with less than a half of those with dementia ever attracting a diagnosis of dementia. The service response to this has been to develop memory clinics and other services to enable good quality diagnosis of the syndrome of dementia and its sub-types.

This narrative review considers who memory assessment services are for and what they should aim to achieve. We will consider the evidence base and discuss “what good looks like.”

The sparsity of the evidence base for the provision of memory services is striking. There is a lack of studies that have evaluated the absolute and relative impact of different models of diagnostic services or the impact of diagnosis and stage of illness at diagnosis.

There remains genuine uncertainly about: the positive and negative impacts of receiving the diagnosis of dementia; the effects of receiving the diagnosis of dementia at an earlier or later stage; and how best to provide memory assessment services in terms of clinical and cost-effectiveness. We need applied health research designed to fill these important evidence gaps, resolving uncertainty, and allowing the development and delivery of efficient and effective services and policy to enable people to live well with dementia. The methodology that will be needed will be a challenge since, due to ethical and practical considerations, it is likely to have to be observational rather than experimental.

Agitation is common across neuropsychiatric disorders and contributes to disability, institutionalization, and diminished quality of life for patients and their caregivers. There is no consensus definition of agitation and no widespread agreement on what elements should be included in the syndrome. The International Psychogeriatric Association formed an Agitation Definition Work Group (ADWG) to develop a provisional consensus definition of agitation in patients with cognitive disorders that can be applied in epidemiologic, non-interventional clinical, pharmacologic, non-pharmacologic interventional, and neurobiological studies. A consensus definition will facilitate communication and cross-study comparison and may have regulatory applications in drug development programs.

The ADWG developed a transparent process using a combination of electronic, face-to-face, and survey-based strategies to develop a consensus based on agreement of a majority of participants. Nine-hundred twenty-eight respondents participated in the different phases of the process.

Agitation was defined broadly as: (1) occurring in patients with a cognitive impairment or dementia syndrome; (2) exhibiting behavior consistent with emotional distress; (3) manifesting excessive motor activity, verbal aggression, or physical aggression; and (4) evidencing behaviors that cause excess disability and are not solely attributable to another disorder (psychiatric, medical, or substance-related). A majority of the respondents rated all surveyed elements of the definition as “strongly agree” or “somewhat agree” (68–88% across elements). A majority of the respondents agreed that the definition is appropriate for clinical and research applications.

A provisional consensus definition of agitation has been developed. This definition can be used to advance interventional and non-interventional research of agitation in patients with cognitive impairment.

Depression is a common and costly comorbidity in dementia. There are very few data on the cost-effectiveness of antidepressants for depression in dementia and their effects on carer outcomes.

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sertraline and mirtazapine compared with placebo for depression in dementia.

A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial with a parallel cost-effectiveness analysis (trial registration: ISRCTN88882979 and EudraCT 2006-000105-38). The primary cost-effectiveness analysis compared differences in treatment costs for patients receiving sertraline, mirtazapine or placebo with differences in effectiveness measured by the primary outcome, total Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD) score, over two time periods: 0–13 weeks and 0–39 weeks. The secondary evaluation was a cost-utility analysis using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) computed from the Euro-Qual (EQ-5D) and societal weights over those same periods.

There were 339 participants randomised and 326 with costs data (111 placebo, 107 sertraline, 108 mirtazapine). For the primary outcome, decrease in depression, mirtazapine and sertraline were not cost-effective compared with placebo. However, examining secondary outcomes, the time spent by unpaid carers caring for participants in the mirtazapine group was almost half that for patients receiving placebo (6.74 v. 12.27 hours per week) or sertraline (6.74 v. 12.32 hours per week). Informal care costs over 39 weeks were £1510 and £1522 less for the mirtazapine group compared with placebo and sertraline respectively.

In terms of reducing depression, mirtazapine and sertraline were not cost-effective for treating depression in dementia. However, mirtazapine does appear likely to have been cost-effective if costing includes the impact on unpaid carers and with quality of life included in the outcome. Unpaid (family) carer costs were lower with mirtazapine than sertraline or placebo. This may have been mediated via the putative ability of mirtazapine to ameliorate sleep disturbances and anxiety. Given the priority and the potential value of supporting family carers of people with dementia, further research is warranted to investigate the potential of mirtazapine to help with behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia and in supporting carers.