Joshua D Grill1, Chelsea G Cox2, Sarah Kremen3, Mario F Mendez4, Edmond Teng4, Jill Shapira4, John M Ringman5, Liana G Apostolova6. 1. Institute for Memory Impairments and Neurological Disorders, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA. Electronic address: jgrill@uci.edu. 2. Institute for Memory Impairments and Neurological Disorders, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA. 3. Department of Neurology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Department of Neurology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Greater Los Angeles VA Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 5. Department of Neurology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 6. Department of Neurology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Alzheimer's Disease Center, University of Indiana, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Department of Neurology, University of Indiana, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Department of Radiology, University of Indiana, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, University of Indiana, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Amyloid imaging is a tool that has recently become available to dementia specialists evaluating patients with possible Alzheimer's disease. Studies have assessed the impact of amyloid imaging on diagnostic and treatment decisions, but patient and family perspectives have received less attention. METHODS: To examine how amyloid imaging affects the diagnostic experience of patients and families, we interviewed members of 26 patient-caregiver dyads with whom a neurologist discussed the option of amyloid positron emission tomography. RESULTS: Most participants who chose to undergo amyloid imaging would choose to do so again. Regardless of the scan outcome, patients and caregivers commonly expressed relief on learning the scan results. Some participants expressed expectations that were beyond scan capabilities. DISCUSSION: Amyloid imaging may provide information that patients and their families find useful. Clinicians must set correct expectations and ensure that families understand the limitations of amyloid imaging.
INTRODUCTION: Amyloid imaging is a tool that has recently become available to dementia specialists evaluating patients with possible Alzheimer's disease. Studies have assessed the impact of amyloid imaging on diagnostic and treatment decisions, but patient and family perspectives have received less attention. METHODS: To examine how amyloid imaging affects the diagnostic experience of patients and families, we interviewed members of 26 patient-caregiver dyads with whom a neurologist discussed the option of amyloid positron emission tomography. RESULTS: Most participants who chose to undergo amyloid imaging would choose to do so again. Regardless of the scan outcome, patients and caregivers commonly expressed relief on learning the scan results. Some participants expressed expectations that were beyond scan capabilities. DISCUSSION: Amyloid imaging may provide information that patients and their families find useful. Clinicians must set correct expectations and ensure that families understand the limitations of amyloid imaging.
Authors: C G Schipke; O Peters; I Heuser; T Grimmer; M N Sabbagh; O Sabri; C Hock; M Kunz; J Kuhlmann; C Reininger; M Blankenburg Journal: Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Date: 2012-07-20 Impact factor: 2.959
Authors: Anthony S Zannas; P Murali Doraiswamy; Katie S Shpanskaya; Kelly R Murphy; Jeffrey R Petrella; James R Burke; Terence Z Wong Journal: Neurocase Date: 2013-05-14 Impact factor: 0.881
Authors: Brian D Carpenter; Chengjie Xiong; Emily K Porensky; Monica M Lee; Patrick J Brown; Mary Coats; David Johnson; John C Morris Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2008-01-05 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Melissa J Armstrong; Gary S Gronseth; Gregory S Day; Carol Rheaume; Slande Alliance; C D Mullins Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2019 Jul-Sep Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Elena Portacolone; Julene K Johnson; Kenneth E Covinsky; Jodi Halpern; Robert L Rubinstein Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2018 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Joshua D Grill; Liana G Apostolova; Szofia Bullain; Jeffrey M Burns; Chelsea G Cox; Malcolm Dick; Dean Hartley; Claudia Kawas; Sarah Kremen; Jennifer Lingler; Oscar L Lopez; Mark Mapstone; Aimee Pierce; Gil Rabinovici; J Scott Roberts; Seyed Ahmad Sajjadi; Edmond Teng; Jason Karlawish Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2017-05-04 Impact factor: 6.982
Authors: Arno de Wilde; Marieke M van Buchem; René H J Otten; Femke Bouwman; Andrew Stephens; Frederik Barkhof; Philip Scheltens; Wiesje M van der Flier Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2018-07-28 Impact factor: 6.982
Authors: Emily A Largent; Maramawit Abera; Kristin Harkins; Sara J Feldman; Wendy R Uhlmann; J Scott Roberts; Jason Karlawish Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 5.562