The Use of the Integrated Cognitive Assessment (ICA) to Improve the Efficiency of Primary Care Referrals to Memory Services in the Accelerating Dementia Pathway Technologies (ADePT) Study

Background Current primary care cognitive assessment tools are either crude or time-consuming instruments that can only detect cognitive impairment when it is well established. This leads to unnecessary or late referrals to memory services, by which time the disease may have already progressed into more severe stages. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, some memory services have adapted to the new environment by shifting to remote assessments of patients to meet service user demand. However, the use of remote cognitive assessments has been inconsistent, and there has been little evaluation of the outcome of such a change in clinical practice. Emerging research has highlighted computerised cognitive tests, such as the Integrated Cognitive Assessment (ICA), as the leading candidates for adoption in clinical practice. This is true both during the pandemic and in the post-COVID-19 era as part of healthcare innovation. Objectives The Accelerating Dementias Pathways Technologies (ADePT) Study was initiated in order to address this challenge and develop a real-world evidence basis to support the adoption of ICA as an inexpensive screening tool for the detection of cognitive impairment and improving the efficiency of the dementia care pathway. Methods Ninety-nine patients aged 55-90 who have been referred to a memory clinic by a general practitioner (GP) were recruited. Participants completed the ICA either at home or in the clinic along with medical history and usability questionnaires. The GP referral and ICA outcome were compared with the specialist diagnosis obtained at the memory clinic. Participants were given the option to carry out a retest visit where they were again given the chance to take the ICA test either remotely or face-to-face. Results The primary outcome of the study compared GP referral with specialist diagnosis of MCI/dementia. Of those the GP referred to memory clinics, 78% were necessary referrals, with ~22% unnecessary referrals, or patients who should have been referred to other services as they had disorders other than MCI/dementia. In the same population the ICA was able to correctly identify cognitive impairment in ~90% of patients, with approximately 9% of patients being false negatives. From the subset of unnecessary GP referrals, the ICA classified ~72% of those as not having cognitive impairment, suggesting that these unnecessary referrals may not have been made if the ICA was in use. Conclusions The results from this study demonstrate the potential of the ICA as a screening tool, which can be used to support accurate referrals from primary care settings, along with the work conducted in memory clinics and in secondary care. ### Competing Interest Statement Chris Kalafatis: shareholder at Cognetivity ltd ;Seyed-Mahdi Khaligh-Razavi: CIO and shareholder at Cognetivity ltd; Hadi Modarres & Panos Apostolou: previous Employee and stock options holder at Cognetivity ltd ### Clinical Protocols ### Funding Statement This study was funded by Innovate UK in form of a grant to Cognetivity Ltd, in collaboration with Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, and Alzheimer's Research Uk. ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: Approved 27/02/2020, North of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (Summerfield House, 2 Eday Road, Aberdeen, AB15 6RE, UK; +44 (0)1224 558458; nosres@nhs.net), ref: 20/NS/0029 I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.