Mukadam Naaheed, Marston Louise, Flanagan Katie, Ma'u Etuini, Cheung Gary, Böhning Dankmar
University College London, London, UK.
University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
BMC Geriatr. 2025 Jan 2;25(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s12877-024-05591-0.
To our knowledge capture-recapture techniques have not been used to estimate dementia prevalence using routinely collected data in England, nor have they been used to estimate changes in undiagnosed dementia over time. In this study we aimed to use routinely collected electronic health records to estimate the number of undiagnosed dementia cases there are in England and how this has changed over time. We also aimed to assess whether proportion of undiagnosed cases differed by age group, ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation and sex.
We used routinely collected primary care data linked to hospital episode statistics from 1997 to 2018. We tabulated capture of dementia in each of the two datasets and used the Lincoln-Petersen estimator to estimate numbers of missing dementia diagnoses per year along with the estimated total number of cases and the proportion of cases identified. We calculated age and sex-adjusted prevalence of dementia for each year and used proportion of cases identified to estimate the underlying population prevalence of dementia per year. We conducted beta regression to estimate how sex, age band, deprivation and ethnic group affects the proportion of dementia cases identified, adjusting for year.
Proportion of cases out of the estimated total that were identified, rose from 42.4% in 1997 to 84.4% in 2018. Estimated population prevalence of dementia rose from 1997 to a high of 4.4% in 2018 in those aged ≥ 65. Proportion of dementia cases identified did not vary by sex but a lower proportion of those from the South Asian ethnic group were diagnosed compared to the White population (coeff -0.115, 95% CI -0.218 to -0.011). Compared to those aged 65-74, those aged 75-84 and 85 + had higher proportions of dementia diagnosed (75-84 Coeff 0.259, 95% CI 0.153-0.366; 85 + Coeff 0.185, 95% CI 0.079-0.291). Those living in the two most deprived areas had a higher proportion of dementia diagnosed compared to the least deprived area (IMD quintile 4 vs 1 coeff 0.093, 95% CI 0.014 to 0.173, IMD quintile 5 vs 1 coeff 0.162, 95% CI 0.083 to 0.242).
Proportion of dementia cases identified has increased over time and results indicate that underlying prevalence of dementia may be lower than previously estimated but this needs replication. Greater focus needs to be given to those with dementia onset at younger ages and those from South Asian backgrounds as dementia is relatively under-diagnosed in these groups.
据我们所知,在英格兰尚未使用捕获-再捕获技术通过常规收集的数据来估计痴呆症患病率,也未用于估计未诊断痴呆症随时间的变化情况。在本研究中,我们旨在利用常规收集的电子健康记录来估计英格兰未诊断痴呆症病例的数量以及随时间的变化情况。我们还旨在评估未诊断病例的比例是否因年龄组、种族、社会经济剥夺程度和性别而异。
我们使用了1997年至2018年与医院病历统计数据相关联的常规收集的初级保健数据。我们将两个数据集中每个数据集的痴呆症捕获情况制成表格,并使用林肯-彼得森估计器来估计每年遗漏的痴呆症诊断数量、估计的病例总数以及已识别病例的比例。我们计算了每年经年龄和性别调整后的痴呆症患病率,并使用已识别病例的比例来估计每年痴呆症的潜在总体患病率。我们进行了贝塔回归,以估计性别、年龄组、剥夺程度和种族如何影响已识别痴呆症病例的比例,并对年份进行了调整。
在估计的病例总数中,已识别病例的比例从1997年的42.4%上升至2018年的84.4%。1997年至2018年,年龄≥65岁人群中痴呆症的估计总体患病率从较低水平上升至最高4.4%。已识别痴呆症病例的比例在性别上没有差异,但与白人相比,南亚族裔被诊断出痴呆症的比例较低(系数-0.115,95%置信区间-0.218至-0.011)。与65-74岁年龄组相比,75-84岁和85岁及以上年龄组被诊断出痴呆症的比例更高(75-84岁系数0.259,95%置信区间0.153-0.366;85岁及以上系数0.185,95%置信区间0.079-0.291)。与最不贫困地区相比,生活在两个最贫困地区的人群被诊断出痴呆症的比例更高(多重贫困指数第4五分位数与第1五分位数相比系数0.093,95%置信区间0.014至0.173,多重贫困指数第5五分位数与第1五分位数相比系数0.162,95%置信区间0.083至0.242)。
随着时间的推移,已识别痴呆症病例的比例有所增加,结果表明痴呆症的潜在患病率可能低于先前估计,但这需要重复验证。需要更多地关注发病年龄较轻的痴呆症患者以及来自南亚背景的患者,因为这些群体中的痴呆症相对诊断不足。