Interventions for people living with dementia: updates from 2024 Lancet Commission

Abstract Background The progressive nature of dementia and the complex needs means that people living with dementia require tailored approaches to address their changing care needs over time. These include physical multimorbidity, psychological, behavioural, and cognitive symptoms and possible risks arising from these and helping family caregivers. However, provision of these interventions is highly variable between and within countries, partly due to uncertainty about their efficacy and scarce resources. In the 2024 update of the Lancet Commission we aimed to summarise published evidence about the effect of non‐pharmacological interventions for people with dementia and their carers on cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms and other person‐centred outcomes. Method We reviewed and summarised evidence according to expert consensus opinion. Result There is moderate‐quality evidence from a Cochrane review of 25 studies for effect of cognitive stimulation therapy on cognition; 1.99 (1.24‐2.74) Mini‐Mental State Examination points higher compared to control groups, and clinically relevant improvements in communication and social interaction. Multicomponent interventions for family carers reduce family carer depression, burden, or stress and are cost‐effective but remote delivery of these interventions was not better than care as usual. A meta‐analysis of 7 studies of tailored activity programmes for people with dementia found a moderate effect on improving quality of life (standardised ES Cohen’s d 0.79, 0.39–1.18; 7 studies, n = 160), decreasing neuropsychiatric symptoms (0.62; 0.40–0.83) and decreasing carer burden (0.68, 0.29–1.07) but there is little evidence on cost‐effectiveness. Exercise interventions were not effective in improving neuropsychiatric symptoms, cognition or functioning. We discuss evidence for other treatments for specific neuropsychiatric symptoms. Conclusion There is developing evidence for benefit of psychological and social interventions on key outcomes including cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms and quality of life, with sufficient strength of evidence and cost‐effectiveness to justify these being implemented and offered routinely to people with dementia. Interventions generally should be tailored to specific symptoms and individualised to patient preferences and goals. Most interventions have been tested in majority ethnic populations in high income countries: future interventions should be co‐designed with local communities to ensure that they are appropriate for the context, culture, beliefs and practices.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.085068
Primary Topic
Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Interventions for people living with dementia: updates from 2024 Lancet Commission

Suvarna Alladi, Noeline Nakasujja, Kenneth J. Rockwood, Geir Selbæk et al.
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
article

Interventions for people living with dementia: updates from 2024 Lancet Commission

Suvarna Alladi, Noeline Nakasujja, Kenneth J. Rockwood, Geir Selbæk, Sebastian Walsh, Cleusa P Ferri, Nick C. Fox, Quincy M. Samus, Alistair Burns, Mika Kivimaki B, Sube Banerjee, Eric B. Larson, Robert Howard, Lon S. Schneider, Archana Singh‐Manoux, Gill Livingston, Jonathan Huntley, Helen C. Kales, Kathy Liu, Andrew Sommerlad, Carol Brayne, Naaheed Mukadam, Sergi Costafreda Gonzalez, Yao Yao, Kokoro Shirai, David Ames, Laura N. Gitlin
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background The progressive nature of dementia and the complex needs means that people living with dementia require tailored approaches to address their changing care needs over time. These include physical multimorbidity, psychological, behavioural, and cognitive symptoms and possible risks arising from these and helping family caregivers. However, provision of these interventions is highly variable between and within countries, partly due to uncertainty about their efficacy and scarce resources. In the 2024 update of the Lancet Commission we aimed to summarise published evidence about the effect of non‐pharmacological interventions for people with dementia and their carers on cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms and other person‐centred outcomes. Method We reviewed and summarised evidence according to expert consensus opinion. Result There is moderate‐quality evidence from a Cochrane review of 25 studies for effect of cognitive stimulation therapy on cognition; 1.99 (1.24‐2.74) Mini‐Mental State Examination points higher compared to control groups, and clinically relevant improvements in communication and social interaction. Multicomponent interventions for family carers reduce family carer depression, burden, or stress and are cost‐effective but remote delivery of these interventions was not better than care as usual. A meta‐analysis of 7 studies of tailored activity programmes for people with dementia found a moderate effect on improving quality of life (standardised ES Cohen’s d 0.79, 0.39–1.18; 7 studies, n = 160), decreasing neuropsychiatric symptoms (0.62; 0.40–0.83) and decreasing carer burden (0.68, 0.29–1.07) but there is little evidence on cost‐effectiveness. Exercise interventions were not effective in improving neuropsychiatric symptoms, cognition or functioning. We discuss evidence for other treatments for specific neuropsychiatric symptoms. Conclusion There is developing evidence for benefit of psychological and social interventions on key outcomes including cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms and quality of life, with sufficient strength of evidence and cost‐effectiveness to justify these being implemented and offered routinely to people with dementia. Interventions generally should be tailored to specific symptoms and individualised to patient preferences and goals. Most interventions have been tested in majority ethnic populations in high income countries: future interventions should be co‐designed with local communities to ensure that they are appropriate for the context, culture, beliefs and practices.

Alzheimer s & DementiaVol. 20(S4)
University of Southern California (US), Oslo University Hospital (NO), Dalhousie University (CA), University of Nottingham (GB), Johns Hopkins University (US), Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute (US), Inserm (FR), The University of Melbourne (AU), University of Oslo (NO), University of Washington (US), Peking University (CN), Université Paris Cité (FR), University of Cambridge (GB), Sykehuset i Vestfold (NO), University of Manchester (GB), National Ageing Research Institute (AU), Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz (BR), Cambridge University Health Partners (GB), UK Dementia Research Institute (GB), National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (GB), University College London (GB), National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (IN), Makerere University (UG), Drexel University (US), University of California, Davis (US), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (BR), Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust (GB), The University of Osaka (JP)
Openalex Percentile: Top 64%
Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.