Using data linkage for national surveillance of clinical quality indicators for dementia care among Australian aged care users

Antidementia and Psychotropic Drug Use in Older People With Dementia in Australia: A National Data Linkage Study

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the national prevalence of antidementia and psychotropic medication use, and sociodemographic factors associated with their use, in Australians living with dementia.

DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Nationwide data linkage study using 2021 Census and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) data. All people aged 65 or older with dementia (self-reported in the Census or dispensed an antidementia drug subsidized by the PBS) were included.

METHODS

Medication use was defined as at least 1 dispensing during the 3-month period following the Census (August-October 2021). Prevalence of antidementia and psychotropic medication use, including antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and Z-drugs, antiepileptics, opioids, and psychostimulants, was calculated. Sociodemographic factors associated with medication use were explored using multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Of the 177,809 older people living with dementia included, 58.6% were using at least 1 psychotropic medication. Antidepressants were the most commonly used psychotropics (41%), followed by opioids (20%) and antipsychotics (13%). Antidementia medications were used by a quarter of people with dementia (26%). People with dementia living in the highest socioeconomic area were more likely to use antidementia medications (odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 95% CI, 1.17-1.28) and less likely to use psychotropics (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.88-0.95) compared with people living in the lowest socioeconomic area. Conversely, those living in inner regional areas were more likely to use psychotropics (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.10) and less likely to use antidementia medications (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.77-0.82) compared with people living in metropolitan areas.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Psychotropics were commonly used in people with dementia in Australia. Disparities in access to health care due to socioeconomic status or remoteness may have influenced the use of antidementia and psychotropic medications. Further strategies to allow more equitable access to resources and medications are needed.

Carer-reported measures for a dementia registry: A systematic scoping review and a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Informal carers play a critical role in supporting people with dementia. We conducted a scoping review and a qualitative study to inform the identification and development of carer-reported measures for a dementia clinical quality registry.

METHODS

Phase 1-Scoping review: Searches to identify carer-reported health and well-being measures were conducted in three databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Embase). Data were extracted to record how the measures were administered, the domains of quality-of-life addressed and whether they had been used in a registry context. Phase 2-Qualitative study: Four focus groups were conducted with carers to examine the acceptability of selected measures and to identify outcomes that were important but missing from these measures.

RESULTS

Phase 1: Ninety-nine carer measures were identified with the top four being the Zarit Burden Interview (n = 39), the Short-Form12/36 (n = 14), the Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced scale and the Sense of Coherence scale (both n = 9). Modes of administration included face-to-face (n = 50), postal (n = 11), telephone (n = 8) and online (n = 5). No measure had been used in a registry context. Phase 2: Carers preferred brief measures that included both outcome and experience questions, reflected changes in carers' circumstances and included open-ended questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Carer-reported measures for a dementia clinical quality registry need to include both outcome and experience questions to capture carers' perceptions of the process and outcomes of care and services. Existing carer-reported measures have not been used in a dementia registry context and adaption and further research are required.

Clinical Quality Indicators for Monitoring Hospitalizations Among Older People with Dementia Accessing Aged Care Services

BACKGROUND

There is a need for clinical quality indicators (CQIs) that can be applied to dementia quality registries to monitor care outcomes for people with Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia.

OBJECTIVE

To develop tertiary and primary care-based dementia CQIs for application to clinical registries for individuals with dementia accessing aged care services and determine 1) annual trends in CQI incidence between 2011-2012 and 2015-2016, 2) associated factors, and 3) geographic and facility variation in CQI incidence.

METHODS

This retrospective repeated cross-sectional study included non-Indigenous individuals aged 65-105 years who lived with dementia between July 2008-June 2016, were assessed for government-funded aged care services, and resided in New South Wales or Victoria (n = 180,675). Poisson or negative binomial regression models estimated trends in annual CQI incidence and associated factors. Funnel plots examined CQI variation.

RESULTS

Between 2011-2012 and 2015-2016, CQI incidence increased for falls (11.0% to 13.9%, adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) 1.05 (95% CI 1.01-1.06)) and delirium (4.7% to 6.7%, aIRR 1.09 (95% CI 1.07-1.10)), decreased for unplanned hospitalizations (28.7% to 27.9%, aIRR 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-0.99)) and remained steady for fracture (6.2% to 6.5%, aIRR 1.01 (95% CI 0.99-1.01)) and pressure injuries (0.5% to 0.4%, aIRR 0.99 (95% CI 0.96-1.02)). Being male, older, having more comorbidities and living in a major city were associated with higher CQI incidence. Considerable geographical and facility variation was observed for unplanned hospitalizations and delirium CQIs.

CONCLUSIONS

The CQI results highlighted considerable morbidity. The CQIs tested should be considered for application in clinical quality registries to monitor dementia care quality.

Registry of Senior Australians (ROSA): integrating cross-sectoral information to evaluate quality and safety of care provided to older people

PURPOSE

The Registry of Senior Australians (ROSA) was established to evaluate aged care experiences in Australia. In this manuscript, we describe the ROSA framework, the two ROSA cohorts, highlights from research findings, and future plans.

PARTICIPANTS

The South Australian ROSA Prospective Cohort (August 2018-June 2020) enrolled 26 605 participants, of which 59.2% (N=15 745) are women, with a median age of 83 (interquartile range (IQR) 77-88). The National ROSA Historical Cohort (January 2002-June 2020) includes 1 694 206 participants with an aged care eligibility assessment, of which 59.1% (N=1 001 705) are women and the median age is 78 (IQR 72-83).

FINDINGS TO DATE

Most research using the ROSA has focused on dementia, service accessibility, quality and safety of care, falls and injuries and quality use of medicines. The ROSA has also examined the experience of individuals with highly prevalent and understudied conditions in aged care settings (eg, eye and mental health) and aspects of services (eg, built environment) and innovation (eg, mobile radiological services) that can affect older people's health. Important learnings from the ROSA's development include the significant resources and multidisciplinary expertise required for establishing this platform. Between 2018 and 2022, 43 academic publications, eight reports of the Australian Government Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety, and several reports to state health authorities and professional societies have used the ROSA.

FUTURE PLANS

Our plans include to: (1) continue delivering high-quality evidence to support the improvement of ageing and aged care services; (2) influence and improve the quality of research in and for the aged care sector; (3) expand scope to facilitate examining aims in more depth; (4) include future aged care sector data collections within the ROSA; (5) inform best practices and innovate how consumer engagement occurs in research; (6) monitor and evaluate the impact of the 2021 Australian Aged Care Reforms.

Primary and Secondary Care Related Quality Indicators for Dementia Care Among Australian Aged Care Users: National Trends, Risk Factors, and Variation

Background: Studies related to clinical quality indicators (CQIs) in dementia have focused on hospitalizations, medication management, and safety. Less attention has been paid to indicators related to primary and secondary care. Objective: To evaluate the incidence of primary and secondary care CQIs for Australians with dementia using government-subsidized aged care. The examined CQIs were: comprehensive medication reviews, 75+ health assessments, comprehensive geriatric assessments, chronic disease management plans, general practitioner (GP) mental health treatment plans, and psychiatrist attendances. Methods: Retrospective cohort study (2011–2016) of 255,458 individuals. National trend analyses estimated incidence rates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using Poisson or negative binomial regression. Associations were assessed using backward stepwise multivariate Poisson or negative binomial regression model, as appropriate. Funnel plots examined geographic and PRAC facility variation. Results: CQI incidence increased in all CQIs but medication reviews. For the overall cohort, 75+ health assessments increased from 1.07/1000 person-days to 1.16/1000 person-days (adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) = 1.03, 95% CI 1.02–1.03).Comprehensive geriatric assessments increased from 0.24 to 0.37/1000 person-days (aIRR = 1.12, 95% CI 1.10–1.14). GP mental health treatment plans increased from 1.30 to 2.1/1000 person-days (aIRR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.12–1.15). Psychiatric attendances increased from 0.09 to 0.11/1000 person-days (aIRR = 1.05, 95% CI 1.03–1.07). Being female, older, having fewer comorbidities, and living outside a major city were associated with lower likelihood of using the services. Large geographical and facility variation was observed (0–92%). Conclusion: Better use of primary and secondary care services to address needs of individuals with dementia is urgently needed.