Coronary Heart Disease, Cognitive Impairment and Patient‐Physician‐Communication: Data from the MenDis‐CHD study

Lena Sannemann,Charlotte Leikert,Hendrik Müller,Laura Nordmeyer,Samia Peltzer,Frank Schulz‐Nieswandt,Christian Albus,Frank Jessen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.078304
2023-12-01
Abstract:Abstract Background Coronary heart disease (CHD) and dementia often co‐occur in the aging population. In addition, CHD seems to increase the risk for subsequent cognitive decline, which may in turn negatively affect the prognosis of CHD. Current CHD guidelines therefore recommend appropriate diagnosis and management of comorbid cognitive impairment. Here, we present the progression and characteristics of cognitive impairment in a group of patients with CHD and their perception of care in the patient‐physician‐relationship. Method For the MenDis‐CHD study, n = 364 patients with CHD were recruited from cardiologic hospital departments, rehabilitation clinics and cardiologist practices in Cologne, Germany. Medical records were used to assess severity of CHD and comorbidities. The New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Classification was applied for estimation of heart failure‐related symptom severity. Each patient was screened for cognitive impairment (DemTect) and depressive or anxiety symptoms (HADS questionnaire) as well as for subjective cognitive deficits. Patients were asked whether cognitive impairment was discussed with the treating physician. A follow‐up was carried out after M = 3.19 [2.2‐4.2] years in n = 118 patients. We compared patients whose cognition declined based on DemTect score to those who remained stable using t‐tests/Mann‐Whitney‐U‐tests and X2‐tests. Result At baseline, 10.2% of patients were screened positive for cognitive impairment, while 18.4% reported subjective cognitive deficits. Patients with a decline in cognition between study visits were significantly older (M = 67.9 vs. M = 63.1, t(115) = ‐2.7, p = .009) and showed more depressive symptoms (M = 5.0 vs. M = 3.8, t(115) = ‐2.1, p = .039). They also had more severe NYHA grades (M = 2.1 vs. M = 1.7, U(102) = 2044.5, p = .011) and a concomitant cerebrovascular diagnosis was more frequent compared to patients who did not decline (20.0% vs. 4.1%, X2(1) = 5.2, p = .048). Out of those who experienced either subjective or objective impairment at baseline (n = 88), 38.6% indicated that cognitive symptoms had previously been addressed during visits with their primary attending physician and 9.1% had been actively approached by their physician in this regard. Conclusion A relevant proportion of CHD patients displayed cognitive symptoms at baseline with progression at follow‐up. Conversations about cognitive symptoms with the physician occurred only in a minority. Our data supports the importance of raising awareness about the link between CHD and cognitive impairment in physicians.
clinical neurology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?