Interest in and perceived benefits and risks of Alzheimer’s disease clinical and biomarker results disclosure among diverse participants and care partners
Feldman, Sara J; Lesniak, Mary; Milliken, Marie; Sadaghiyani, Shima; Roberts, J. Scott; Hampstead, Benjamin M.; Rahman-Filipiak, Annalise
2022-12
Citation
Feldman, Sara J; Lesniak, Mary; Milliken, Marie; Sadaghiyani, Shima; Roberts, J. Scott; Hampstead, Benjamin M.; Rahman-Filipiak, Annalise (2022). "Interest in and perceived benefits and risks of Alzheimer- s disease clinical and biomarker results disclosure among diverse participants and care partners." Alzheimer’s & Dementia 18: n/a-n/a.
Abstract
BackgroundAlzheimer’s disease (AD) biomarker disclosure is a potential avenue for tailoring person-centered care for patients and families and targeting known health disparities. However, disclosure cannot take a one-size-fits-all approach. It is critical to understand whether older adults with and without cognitive impairment (i.e., mild cognitive impairment (MCI)) and their care partners are interested in engaging in biomarker disclosure, and what perceived benefits and risks exist, as a function of race, social determinants, and clinical status.Method57 participant-care partner dyads [participants: 56.1% female; 36.8% Black, 74.3±5.98 years, 42.1% with MCI; partners: 79.0% female; 33.3% Black, 66.9±10.9 years] completed a semi-structured interview assessing demographic factors, healthcare access, economic stability, social support, and perspectives on AD biomarker disclosure. Fisher’s exact tests were used to assess participant and partner characteristics associated with interest in, and perceived benefits and risks of the participant engaging in results disclosure. Differences in participant and care partner responses were evaluated using two-sample t-tests.ResultWhen asked to select the main benefit and disadvantage of knowing AD risk (out of 9 benefits and 10 disadvantages), participants and partners described varied benefits. Participants and partners both endorsed having the opportunity to engage in Alzheimer’s disease treatments and/or clinical trials (23.2% v. 29.8%), followed by having the opportunity to inform long-term care plans (14.3% v. 17.5%) and learning more about the participants’ health (12.5% v. 15.8%) as primary motivators for engaging in biomarker disclosure. In contrast, the majority of participants (80.8%) and partners (82.1%) endorsed no perceived disadvantages of learning the participants’ biomarker information for risk of dementia-Alzheimer’s Type. Nearly all dyads endorsed moderate to strong interest in cognitive test results (96.5% participants; 93.0% partners), structural neuroimaging (94.8%; 89.4%), genotyping (94.8%; 87.7%) and protein biomarker disclosure (98.3%; 87.7%). Interest was not associated with diagnosis, race, or social determinants of health.ConclusionParticipants and care partners endorse almost universal interest, varied benefits and few disadvantages of learning the participant’s AD biomarker results. Pre-disclosure education and decisional-capacity assessment are needed to ensure informed decision-making. Further data on how social determinants may influence motivations for, reactions to, and risks of AD biomarker disclosure are needed.Publisher
Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
ISSN
1552-5260 1552-5279
Other DOIs
Types
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordCollections
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.