Introduction: Standardized cognitive assessment would enhance diagnostic reliability across memory clinics. An expert consensus adapted the Uniform Dataset (UDS)-3 for European centers, the clinician's UDS (cUDS). This study assessed its implementation acceptability and feasibility. Methods: We developed a survey investigating barriers, facilitators, and willingness to implement the cUDS. With a mixed-methods design, we analyzed data from academic memory clinics. Results: Seventy-eight percent of responding clinicians were experienced neuropsychologists/psychologists and 22% were medical specialists coming from 18 European countries. Sixty-five percent clinicians were willing to implement cUDS. General barriers related to implementation (43%) and clinical-methodological domains (21%). Favorable clinicians reported finances (15%) and digitalization (9%) as facilitating, but unavailability of local norms (23%) as hindering. Unfavorable clinicians reported logistical (23%) and time issues (18%). Discussion: Despite challenges, data showed moderate clinicians' acceptability and requirements to improve feasibility. Nonetheless, these results come from academic clinicians. The next steps will require feasibility evaluation in non-academic contexts.

Feasibility of a standard cognitive assessment in European academic memory clinics

Altomare D.;
2023-01-01

Abstract

Introduction: Standardized cognitive assessment would enhance diagnostic reliability across memory clinics. An expert consensus adapted the Uniform Dataset (UDS)-3 for European centers, the clinician's UDS (cUDS). This study assessed its implementation acceptability and feasibility. Methods: We developed a survey investigating barriers, facilitators, and willingness to implement the cUDS. With a mixed-methods design, we analyzed data from academic memory clinics. Results: Seventy-eight percent of responding clinicians were experienced neuropsychologists/psychologists and 22% were medical specialists coming from 18 European countries. Sixty-five percent clinicians were willing to implement cUDS. General barriers related to implementation (43%) and clinical-methodological domains (21%). Favorable clinicians reported finances (15%) and digitalization (9%) as facilitating, but unavailability of local norms (23%) as hindering. Unfavorable clinicians reported logistical (23%) and time issues (18%). Discussion: Despite challenges, data showed moderate clinicians' acceptability and requirements to improve feasibility. Nonetheless, these results come from academic clinicians. The next steps will require feasibility evaluation in non-academic contexts.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11379/595276
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact