Models for delivery and co-ordination of primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living in aged care facilities

BACKGROUND

The number of older people is increasing worldwide and public expenditure on residential aged care facilities (ACFs) is expected to at least double, and possibly triple, by 2050. Co-ordinated and timely care in residential ACFs that reduces unnecessary hospital transfers may improve residents' health outcomes and increase satisfaction with care among ACF residents, their families and staff. These benefits may outweigh the resources needed to sustain the changes in care delivery and potentially lead to cost savings. Our systematic review comprehensively and systematically presents the available evidence of the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of alternative models of providing health care to ACF residents.

OBJECTIVES

Main objective To assess the effectiveness and safety of alternative models of delivering primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living in ACFs. Secondary objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of the alternative models.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers (WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov) on 26 October 2022, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individual and cluster-randomised trials, and cost/cost-effectiveness data collected alongside eligible effectiveness studies. Eligible study participants included older people who reside in an ACF as their place of permanent abode and healthcare professionals delivering or co-ordinating the delivery of healthcare at ACFs. Eligible interventions focused on either ways of delivering primary or secondary health care (or both) or ways of co-ordinating the delivery of this care. Eligible comparators included usual care or another model of care. Primary outcomes were emergency department visits, unplanned hospital admissions and adverse effects (defined as infections, falls and pressure ulcers). Secondary outcomes included adherence to clinical guideline-recommended care, health-related quality of life of residents, mortality, resource use, access to primary or specialist healthcare services, any hospital admissions, length of hospital stay, satisfaction with the health care by residents and their families, work-related satisfaction and work-related stress of ACF staff.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using GRADE. The primary comparison was any alternative model of care versus usual care.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 randomised trials (21,787 participants; three studies only reported number of beds) in this review. Included trials evaluated alternative models of care aimed at either all residents of the ACF (i.e. no specific health condition; 11 studies), ACF residents with mental health conditions or behavioural problems (12 studies), ACF residents with a specific condition (e.g. residents with pressure ulcers, 13 studies) or residents requiring a specific type of care (e.g. residents after hospital discharge, four studies). Most alternative models of care focused on 'co-ordination of care' (n = 31). Three alternative models of care focused on 'who provides care' and two focused on 'where care is provided' (i.e. care provided within ACF versus outside of ACF). Four models focused on the use of information and communication technology. Usual care, the comparator in all studies, was highly heterogeneous across studies and, in most cases, was poorly reported. Most of the included trials were susceptible to some form of bias; in particular, performance (89%), reporting (66%) and detection (42%) bias. Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may make little or no difference to the proportion of residents with at least one emergency department visit (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.20; 7 trials, 1276 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may reduce the proportion of residents with at least one unplanned hospital admission (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.99, I2 = 53%; 8 trials, 1263 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of alternative models of care on adverse events (proportion of residents with a fall: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.60, I² = 74%; 3 trials, 1061 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and adherence to guideline-recommended care (proportion of residents receiving adequate antidepressant medication: RR 5.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 26.00; 1 study, 65 participants) as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may have little or no effect on the health-related quality of life of ACF residents (MD -0.016, 95% CI -0.036 to 0.004; I² = 23%; 12 studies, 4016 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably make little or no difference to the number of deaths in residents of ACFs (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.16, 24 trials, 3881 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). We did not pool the cost-effectiveness or cost data as the specific costs associated with the various alternative models of care were incomparable, both across models of care as well as across settings. Based on the findings of five economic evaluations (all interventions focused on co-ordination of care), we are uncertain of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of care compared to usual care as the certainty of the evidence is very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may make little or no difference to the number of emergency department visits but may reduce unplanned hospital admissions. We are uncertain of the effect of alternative care models on adverse events (i.e. falls, pressure ulcers, infections) and adherence to guidelines compared to usual care, as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Alternative models of care may have little or no effect on health-related quality of life and probably have no effect on mortality of ACF residents compared to usual care. Importantly, we are uncertain of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of care due to the limited, disparate data available.

Palliative care interventions in advanced dementia

BACKGROUND

Dementia is a chronic, progressive and ultimately fatal neurodegenerative disease. Advanced dementia is characterised by profound cognitive impairment, inability to communicate verbally and complete functional dependence. Usual care of people with advanced dementia is not underpinned universally by a palliative approach. Palliative care has focused traditionally on care of people with cancer, but for more than a decade, there have been calls worldwide to extend palliative care services to include all people with life-limiting illnesses in need of specialist care, including people with dementia. This review is an updated version of a review first published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of palliative care interventions in advanced dementia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register on 7 October 2020. ALOIS contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of several major healthcare databases, trial registries and grey literature sources. We ran additional searches across MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), four other databases and two trial registries on 7 October 2020 to ensure that the searches were as comprehensive and as up-to-date as possible.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised (RCTs) and non-randomised controlled trials (nRCTs), controlled before-and-after studies and interrupted time series studies evaluating the impact of palliative care interventions for adults with advanced dementia of any type. Participants could be people with advanced dementia, their family members, clinicians or paid care staff. We included clinical interventions and non-clinical interventions. Comparators were usual care or another palliative care intervention. We did not exclude studies based on outcomes measured.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors (SW, EM, PC) independently assessed all potential studies identified in the search against the review inclusion criteria. Two authors independently extracted data from eligible studies. Where appropriate, we estimated pooled treatment effects in a fixed-effect meta-analysis. We assessed the risk of bias of included studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies (2122 participants) met the review inclusion criteria. Two studies were individually-randomised RCTs, six were cluster-randomised RCTs and one was a controlled before-and-after study. We conducted two separate comparisons: organisation and delivery of care interventions versus usual care (six studies, 1162 participants) and advance care planning interventions versus usual care (three studies, 960 participants). Two studies were carried out in acute hospitals and seven in nursing homes or long-term care facilities. For both comparisons, we found the included studies to be sufficiently similar to conduct meta-analyses. Changes to the organisation and delivery of care for people with advanced dementia may increase comfort in dying (MD 1.49, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.64; 5 studies, 335 participants; very low certainty evidence). However, the evidence is very uncertain and unlikely to be clinically significant. These changes may also increase the likelihood of having a palliative care plan in place (RR 5.84, 95% CI 1.37 to 25.02; 1 study, 99 participants; I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence), but again the evidence is very uncertain. Such interventions probably have little effect on the use of non-palliative interventions (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.72; 2 studies, 292 participants; I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). They may also have little or no effect on documentation of advance directives (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.25; 2 studies, 112 participants; I² = 52%; very low certainty evidence), or whether discussions take place about advance care planning (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.18; 1 study, 193 participants; I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence) and goals of care (RR 2.36, 95% CI 1.00 to 5.54; 1 study, 13 participants; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence). No included studies assessed adverse effects. Advance care planning interventions for people with advanced dementia probably increase the documentation of advance directives (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.41; 2 studies, 384; moderate certainty evidence) and the number of discussions about goals of care (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.59; 2 studies, 384 participants; moderate certainty evidence). They may also slightly increase concordance with goals of care (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.79; 1 study, 63 participants; low certainty evidence). On the other hand, they may have little or no effect on perceived symptom management (MD -1.80, 95% CI -6.49 to 2.89; 1 study, 67 participants; very low certainty evidence) or whether advance care planning discussions occur (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.24; 1 study, 67 participants; low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence on palliative care interventions in advanced dementia is limited in quantity and certainty. When compared to usual care, changes to the organisation and delivery of care for people with advanced dementia may lead to improvements in comfort in dying, but the evidence for this was of very low certainty. Advance care planning interventions, compared to usual care, probably increase the documentation of advance directives and the occurrence of discussions about goals of care, and may also increase concordance with goals of care. We did not detect other effects. The uncertainty in the evidence across all outcomes in both comparisons is mainly driven by imprecision of effect estimates and risk of bias in the included studies.

Staff Training Interventions to Improve End-of-Life Care of Nursing Home Residents: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to review evidence from all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using palliative care education or staff training as an intervention to improve nursing home residents' quality of life (QOL) or quality of dying (QOD) or to reduce burdensome hospitalizations.

DESIGN

A systematic review with a narrative summary.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Residents in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Google Scholar, references of known articles, previous reviews, and recent volumes of key journals. RCTs were included in the review. Methodologic quality was assessed.

RESULTS

The search yielded 932 articles after removing the duplicates. Of them, 16 cluster RCTs fulfilled inclusion criteria for analysis. There was a great variety in the interventions with respect to learning methods, intensity, complexity, and length of staff training. Most interventions featured other elements besides staff training. In the 6 high-quality trials, only 1 showed a reduction in hospitalizations, whereas among 6 moderate-quality trials 2 suggested a reduction in hospitalizations. None of the high-quality trials showed effects on residents' QOL or QOD. Staff reported an improved QOD in 1 moderate-quality trial.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Irrespective of the means of staff training, there were surprisingly few effects of education on residents' QOL, QOD, or burdensome hospitalizations. Further studies are needed to explore the reasons behind these findings.

Components of palliative care interventions addressing the needs of people with dementia living in long-term care: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

People with dementia requiring palliative care have multiple needs, which are amplified in long-term care settings. The European Association for Palliative Care White Paper offers recommendations for optimal palliative care in dementia integral for this population, providing useful guidance to inform interventions addressing their specific needs.

AIM

The aim of this study is to describe the components of palliative care interventions for people with dementia in long-term care focusing on shared decision-making and examine their alignment to the European Association for Palliative Care domains of care.

DESIGN

Systematic review with narrative synthesis (PROSPERO ID: CRD42018095649).

DATA SOURCES

Four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and CENTRAL) were searched (earliest records - July 2019) for peer-reviewed articles and protocols in English, reporting on palliative care interventions for people with dementia in long-term care, addressing European Association for Palliative Care Domains 2 (person-centred) or 3 (setting care goals) and ⩾1 other domain.

RESULTS

Fifty-one papers were included, reporting on 32 studies. For each domain (1-10), there were interventions found aiming to address its goal, although no single intervention addressed all domains. Domain 7 (symptom management; n = 19), 6 (avoiding overly aggressive treatment; n = 18) and 10 (education; n = 17) were the most commonly addressed; Domain 5 (prognostication; n = 7) and 4 (continuity of care; n = 2) were the least addressed.

CONCLUSION

Almost all domains were addressed across all interventions currently offered for this population to various degrees, but not within a singular intervention. Future research optimally needs to be theory driven when developing dementia-specific interventions at the end of life, with the European Association for Palliative Care domains serving as a foundation to inform the best care for this population.

Introducing Goals of Patient Care in Residential Aged Care Facilities to Decrease Hospitalization: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

The "Goals of Patient Care" (GOPC) process uses shared decision making to incorporate residents' prior advance care planning (ACP) or preferences into medical treatment orders, guiding health care decisions at a time of clinical deterioration should they be unable to voice their opinions. The objective was to determine whether GOPC medical treatment orders were more effective than ACP alone in preventing emergency department (ED) visits (no hospitalization), ED visits (with hospitalization), and deaths outside the residential aged care facility (RACF).

DESIGN

The study was a prospective cluster randomized controlled trial, with the intervention being the completion of GOPC process by a geriatrician, following a shared decision-making process, incorporating ACP documents or residents' preferences.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The study took place in 6 RACFs in Northern Metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Eligible participants included all permanent residents in participating RACFs for whom written informed consent could be obtained.

MEASURES

The primary outcome was the effect on ED visits and hospitalizations at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included a difference in hospitalization rates at 3 and 12 months, total hospital bed-days, and in-RACF and in-hospital mortality rates.

RESULTS

More than 75% of residents participated, 181 randomized to Intervention and 145 to Control. The intervention did not result in a statistically significant change at 6 months; however, at 12 months, it reached statistical significance with 40% reduction in ED visits and hospitalizations compared with Control, with an incident rate ratio 0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.99, P = .044]. Mortality rates show increased likelihood of dying in the RACF, with statistical significance at 6 months at a relative risk ratio of 2.19 (95% CI 1.16-4.14, P = .016).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

In the RACF population, GOPC medical treatment orders were more effective than ACP alone for decreasing hospitalization and likelihood of dying outside the RACF. GOPC should be considered by both RACF staff and health services to decrease hospitalization and in-hospital mortality.

Quasi-experimental evaluation of a multifaceted intervention to improve quality of end-of-life care and quality of dying for patients with advanced dementia in long-term care institutions

BACKGROUND

Improvement in the quality of end-of-life care for advanced dementia is increasingly recognized as a priority in palliative care.

AIM

To evaluate the impact of a multidimensional intervention to improve quality of care and quality of dying in advanced dementia in long-term care facilities.

DESIGN

Quasi-experimental study with the intervention taking place in two long-term care facilities versus usual care in two others over a 1-year period. The intervention had five components: (1) training program to physicians and nursing staff, (2) clinical monitoring of pain using an observational pain scale, (3) implementation of a regular mouth care routine, (4) early and systematic communication with families about end-of-life care issues with provision of an information booklet, and (5) involvement of a nurse facilitator to implement and monitor the intervention. Quality of care was assessed with the Family Perception of Care Scale. The Symptom Management for End-of-Life Care in Dementia and the Comfort Assessment in Dying scales were used to assess the quality of dying.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 193 residents with advanced dementia and their close family members were included (97 in the intervention group and 96 in the usual care group).

RESULTS

The Family Perception of Care score was significantly higher in the intervention group than in the usual care group (157.3 vs 149.1; p = 0.04). The Comfort Assessment and Symptom Management scores were also significantly higher in the intervention group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our multidimensional intervention in long-term care facilities for patients with terminal dementia resulted in improved quality of care and quality of dying when compared to usual care.

Implementing the compassion intervention, a model for integrated care for people with advanced dementia towards the end of life in nursing homes: a naturalistic feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Many people with dementia die in nursing homes, but quality of care may be suboptimal. We developed the theory-driven 'Compassion Intervention' to enhance end-of-life care in advanced dementia.

OBJECTIVES

To (1) understand how the Intervention operated in nursing homes in different health economies; (2) collect preliminary outcome data and costs of an interdisciplinary care leader (ICL) to facilitate the Intervention; (3) check the Intervention caused no harm.

DESIGN

A naturalistic feasibility study of Intervention implementation for 6 months.

SETTINGS

Two nursing homes in northern London, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty residents with advanced dementia were assessed of whom nine were recruited for data collection; four of these residents' family members were interviewed. Twenty-eight nursing home and external healthcare professionals participated in interviews at 7 (n=19), 11 (n=19) and 15 months (n=10).

INTERVENTION

An ICL led two core Intervention components: (1) integrated, interdisciplinary assessment and care; (2) education and support for paid and family carers.

DATA COLLECTED

Process and outcome data were collected. Symptoms were recorded monthly for recruited residents. Semistructured interviews were conducted at 7, 11 and 15 months with nursing home staff and external healthcare professionals and at 7 months with family carers. ICL hours were costed using Department of Health and Health Education England tariffs.

RESULTS

Contextual differences were identified between sites: nursing home 2 had lower involvement with external healthcare services. Core components were implemented at both sites but multidisciplinary meetings were only established in nursing home 1. The Intervention prompted improvements in advance care planning, pain management and person-centred care; we observed no harm. Six-month ICL costs were £18 255.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation was feasible to differing degrees across sites, dependent on context. Our data inform future testing to identify the Intervention's effectiveness in improving end-of-life care in advanced dementia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02840318: Results.

End of life care for people with dementia: The views of health professionals, social care service managers and frontline staff on key requirements for good practice

Background

Evidence consistently shows that people with advanced dementia experience suboptimal end of life care compared to those with cancer; with increased hospitalisation, inadequate pain control and fewer palliative care interventions. Understanding the views of those service managers and frontline staff who organise and provide care is crucial in order to develop better end of life care for people with dementia.

Methods and findings

Qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted from 2013 to 2015 with 33 service managers and 54 staff involved in frontline care, including doctors, nurses, nursing and care home managers, service development leads, senior managers/directors, care assistants and senior care assistants/team leads. All were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Participants represented a diverse range of service types and occupation. Transcripts were subject to coding and thematic analysis in data meetings. Analysis of the data led to the development of seven key themes: Recognising end of life (EOL) and tools to support end of life care (EOLC), Communicating with families about EOL, Collaborative working, Continuity of care, Ensuring comfort at EOL, Supporting families, Developing and supporting staff. Each is discussed in detail and comprise individual and collective views on approaches to good end of life care for people with dementia.

Conclusions

The significant challenges of providing good end of life care for people with dementia requires that different forms of expertise should be recognised and used; including the skills and knowledge of care assistants. Successfully engaging with people with dementia and family members and helping them to recognise the dying trajectory requires a supportive integration of emotional and technical expertise. The study strengthens the existing evidence base in this area and will be used with a related set of studies (on the views of other stakeholders and observations and interviews conducted in four services) to develop an evidence-based intervention.

Palliative care interventions in advanced dementia

BACKGROUND

Dementia is a chronic, progressive and ultimately fatal neurodegenerative disease. Advanced dementia is characterised by profound cognitive impairment, inability to communicate verbally and complete functional dependence. Usual care of people with advanced dementia is not underpinned universally by a palliative approach. Palliative care has focused traditionally on care of people with cancer but for more than a decade, there have been increased calls worldwide to extend palliative care services to include all people with life-limiting illnesses in need of specialist care, including people with dementia.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of palliative care interventions in advanced dementia and to report on the range of outcome measures used.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialized Register on 4 February 2016. ALOIS contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of several major healthcare databases, trial registries and grey literature sources. We ran additional searches across MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), PsycINFO (OvidSP), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), LILACS (BIREME), Web of Science Core Collection (ISI Web of Science), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization ICTRP trial portal to ensure that the searches were as comprehensive and as up-to-date as possible.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised (RCT) and non-randomised controlled trials (nRCT), controlled before-and-after studies (CBA) and interrupted time series studies evaluating the impact of palliative care interventions for adults with dementia of any type, staged as advanced dementia by a recognised and validated tool. Participants could be people with advanced dementia, their family members, clinicians or paid care staff. We included clinical interventions and non-clinical interventions. Comparators were usual care or another palliative care intervention. We did not exclude studies on the basis of outcomes measured and recorded all outcomes measured in included studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed for inclusion all the potential studies we identified as a result of the search strategy. We resolved any disagreement through discussion or, when required, consulted with the rest of the review team. We independently extracted data and conducted assessment of methodological quality, using standard Cochrane methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified two studies of palliative care interventions for people with advanced dementia. We did not pool data due to the heterogeneity between the two trials in terms of the interventions and the settings. The two studies measured 31 different outcomes, yet they did not measure the same outcome. There are six ongoing studies that we expect to include in future versions of this review.Both studies were at high risk of bias, in part because blinding was not possible. This and small sample sizes meant that the overall certainty of all the evidence was very low.One individually randomised RCT (99 participants) evaluated the effect of a palliative care team for people with advanced dementia hospitalised for an acute illness. While this trial reported that a palliative care plan was more likely to be developed for participants in the intervention group (risk ratio (RR) 5.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37 to 25.02), the plan was only adopted for two participants, both in the intervention group, while in hospital. The palliative care plan was more likely to be available on discharge in the intervention group (RR 4.50, 95% CI 1.03 to 19.75). We found no evidence that the intervention affected mortality in hospital (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.13), decisions to forgo cardiopulmonary resuscitation in hospital or the clinical care provided during hospital admission, but for the latter, event rates were low and the results were associated with a lot of uncertainty.One cluster RCT (256 participants, each enrolled with a family carer) evaluated the effect of a decision aid on end-of-life feeding options on surrogate decision-makers of nursing home residents with advanced dementia. Data for 90 participants (35% of the original study) met the definition of advanced dementia for this review and were re-analysed for the purposes of the review. In this subset, intervention surrogates had lower scores for decisional conflict measured on the Decisional Conflict Scale (mean difference -0.30, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.01, reduction of 0.3 to 0.4 units considered meaningful) and were more likely than participants in the control group to discuss feeding options with a clinician (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.64), but imprecision meant that there was significant uncertainty about both results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Very little high quality work has been completed exploring palliative care interventions in advanced dementia. There were only two included studies in this review, with variation in the interventions and in the settings that made it impossible to conduct a meta-analysis of data for any outcome. Thus, we conclude that there is insufficient evidence to assess the effect of palliative care interventions in advanced dementia. The fact that there are six ongoing studies at the time of this review indicates an increased interest in this area by researchers, which is welcome and needed.

Who cares?

The complexity of the relationship between intellectual disability (ID) and dementia is increasingly acknowledged. In order to operationalize a route towards person-centred care, we introduce the hierarchy model (Pearce, 1999) as a tool to focus the attention of policy and practice on all aspects of caregiving. This tool, which is taken from the family therapy literature, enables practitioners to examine the broad systems that impact on the delivery and receipt of care. In this article, we focus on its utility in scrutinizing end-of-life and later stages of dementia by illustrating its use with three key areas in dementia care. These three areas provide some of the most challenging situations at the end stages, because of the possible treatment options, they are: nutrition, medical interventions, and the location of care provision. This model enables a focused approach to understanding how meaning is created within social interaction. The article draws out implications for practice and policy and has applications for practice internationally.

Psychosocial interventions for people with dementia: An overview and commentary on recent developments

An influential review in 2010 concluded that non-pharmacological multi-component interventions have positive effects on cognitive functioning, activities of daily living, behaviour and mood of people with dementia. Our aim here is to provide an up-to-date overview of research into psychosocial interventions and their impact on psychosocial outcomes. We focused on randomised controlled trials, controlled studies and reviews published between October 2008 and August 2015, since the earlier review. The search of PsychInfo, Medline and the Cochrane database of systematic reviews yielded 61 relevant articles, organised into four themes echoing key phases of the care pathway: Living at home with dementia (five reviews, eight studies), carer interventions (three reviews, four studies), interventions in residential care (16 reviews, 12 studies) and end-of-life care (three reviews, two studies), along with an additional group spanning community and institutional settings (six reviews, two studies). Community findings suggested that appointment of dementia specialists and attention to case management can produce positive outcomes; physical therapies, cognitive training and modified cognitive behaviour therapy also had a range of benefits. There was more limited evidence of positive benefits for people with dementia through interventions with family carers. Thirty-two articles focused on the management of 'behavioural symptoms' through a range of interventions all of which had some evidence of benefit. Also a range of multi-component and specific interventions had benefits for cognitive, emotional and behavioural well-being of people with dementia in residential settings, as well as for quality of life. Overall, interventions tended to be short term with impact only measured in the short term. We recommend further research on interventions to promote living well in the community post-diagnosis and to address end-of-life care. Development of psychosocial interventions would benefit from moving beyond the focus on control of behaviours to focus on wider aspects of life for people with dementia.

Elements of effective palliative care models: a rapid review

BACKGROUND

Population ageing, changes to the profiles of life-limiting illnesses and evolving societal attitudes prompt a critical evaluation of models of palliative care. We set out to identify evidence-based models of palliative care to inform policy reform in Australia.

METHOD

A rapid review of electronic databases and the grey literature was undertaken over an eight week period in April-June 2012. We included policy documents and comparative studies from countries within the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) published in English since 2001. Meta-analysis was planned where >1 study met criteria; otherwise, synthesis was narrative using methods described by Popay et al. (2006).

RESULTS

Of 1,959 peer-reviewed articles, 23 reported systematic reviews, 9 additional RCTs and 34 non-randomised comparative studies. Variation in the content of models, contexts in which these were implemented and lack of detailed reporting meant that elements of models constituted a more meaningful unit of analysis than models themselves. Case management was the element most consistently reported in models for which comparative studies provided evidence for effectiveness. Essential attributes of population-based palliative care models identified by policy and addressed by more than one element were communication and coordination between providers (including primary care), skill enhancement, and capacity to respond rapidly to individuals' changing needs and preferences over time.

CONCLUSION

Models of palliative care should integrate specialist expertise with primary and community care services and enable transitions across settings, including residential aged care. The increasing complexity of care needs, services, interventions and contextual drivers warrants future research aimed at elucidating the interactions between different components and the roles played by patient, provider and health system factors. The findings of this review are limited by its rapid methodology and focus on model elements relevant to Australia's health system.

Functional analysis-based interventions for challenging behaviour in dementia

BACKGROUND

Functional analysis (FA) for the management of challenging behaviour is a promising behavioural intervention that involves exploring the meaning or purpose of an individual's behaviour. It extends the 'ABC' approach of behavioural analysis, to overcome the restriction of having to derive a single explanatory hypothesis for the person's behaviour. It is seen as a first line alternative to traditional pharmacological management for agitation and aggression. FA typically requires the therapist to develop and evaluate hypotheses-driven strategies that aid family and staff caregivers to reduce or resolve a person's distress and its associated behavioural manifestations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of functional analysis-based interventions for people with dementia (and their caregivers) living in their own home or in other settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched ALOIS: the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialized Register on 3 March 2011 using the terms: FA, behaviour (intervention, management, modification), BPSD, psychosocial and Dementia.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with reported behavioural outcomes that could be associated with functional analysis for the management of challenging behaviour in dementia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four reviewers selected trials for inclusion. Two reviewers worked independently to extract data and assess trial quality, including bias. Meta-analyses for reported incidence, frequency, severity of care recipient challenging behaviour and mood (primary outcomes) and caregiver reaction, burden and mood were performed. Details of adverse effects were noted.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen trials are included in the review. The majority were in family care settings. For fourteen studies, FA was just one aspect of a broad multi-component programme of care. Assessing the effect of FA was compromised by ill-defined protocols for the duration of component parts of these programmes (i.e. frequency of the intervention or actual time spent). Therefore, establishing the real effect of the FA component was not possible.Overall, positive effects were noted at post-intervention for the frequency of reported challenging behaviour (but not for incidence or severity) and for caregiver reaction (but not burden or depression). These effects were not seen at follow-up.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The delivery of FA has been incorporated within wide ranging multi-component programmes and study designs have varied according to setting - i.e. family care, care homes and hospital, with surprisingly few studies located in care homes. Our findings suggest potential beneficial effects of multi-component interventions, which utilise FA. Whilst functional analysis for challenging behaviour in dementia care shows promise, it is too early to draw conclusions about its efficacy.

Interventions for improving palliative care for older people living in nursing care homes

BACKGROUND

Residents of nursing care homes for older people are highly likely to die there, making these places where palliative care is needed.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to determine effectiveness of multi-component palliative care service delivery interventions for residents of care homes for older people. The secondary objective was to describe the range and quality of outcome measures.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The grey literature and the following electronic databases were searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (all issue 1, 2010); MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, British Nursing Index, (1806 to February 2010), Science Citation Index Expanded & AMED (all to February 2010). Key journals were hand searched and a PubMed related articles link search was conducted on the final list of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include Randomised Clinical Trials (RCTs), Controlled Clinical Trials (CCTs), controlled before-and-after studies and interrupted time series studies of multi-component palliative care service delivery interventions for residents of care homes for older people. These usually include the assessment and management of physical, psychological and spiritual symptoms and advance care planning. We did not include individual components of palliative care, such as advance care planning.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed quality and risk of bias. Meta analysis was not conducted due to heterogeneity of studies. The analysis comprised a structured narrative synthesis. Outcomes for residents and process of care measures were reported separately.

MAIN RESULTS

Two RCTs and one controlled before-and-after study were included (735 participants). All were conducted in the USA and had several potential sources of bias. Few outcomes for residents were assessed. One study reported higher satisfaction with care and the other found lower observed discomfort in residents with end-stage dementia. Two studies reported group differences on some process measures. Both reported higher referral to hospice services in their intervention group, one found fewer hospital admissions and days in hospital in the intervention group, the other found an increase in do-not-resuscitate orders and documented advance care plan discussions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found few studies, and all were in the USA. Although the results are potentially promising, high quality trials of palliative care service delivery interventions which assess outcomes for residents are needed, particularly outside the USA. These should focus on measuring standard outcomes, assessing cost-effectiveness, and reducing bias.

End of life care for community dwelling older people with dementia: an integrated review

OBJECTIVE

To review the evidence for end-of-life care for community dwelling older people with dementia (including those resident in care homes).

DESIGN

An integrated review synthesised the qualitative and quantitative evidence on end-of-life care for community dwelling older people with dementia. English language studies that focused on prognostic indicators for end-of-life care, assessment, support/relief, respite and educational interventions for community dwelling older people with dementia were included. A user representative group informed decisions on the breadth of literature used. Each study selected was screened independently by two reviewers using a standardised check list.

RESULTS

Sixty eight papers were included. Only 17% (12) exclusively concerned living and dying with dementia at home. Six studies included direct evidence from people with dementia. The studies grouped into four broad categories: Dementia care towards the end of life, palliative symptom management for people with dementia, predicting the approach of death for people with dementia and decision-making. The majority of studies were descriptive. The few studies that developed dementia specific tools to guide end of life care and outcome measures specific to improve comfort and communication, demonstrated what could be achieved, and how much more needs to be done.

CONCLUSIONS

Research on end-of-life care for people with dementia has yet to develop interventions that address the particular challenges that dying with dementia poses. There is a need for investigation of interventions and outcome measures for providing end-of-life care in the settings where the majority of this population live and die.

The challenge of providing palliative care in the nursing home

Nursing homes are increasingly becoming the place of care and site of death for growing numbers of frail older people dying of chronic progressive illnesses. Despite this increase, empirical evidence suggests that providing palliative care in nursing homes is replete with challenges. In a previous publication, the authors examined challenges external to the nursing home that influence the provision of palliative care, and which may be beyond the nursing home's control (Wowchuk et al, 2006). This paper reviews the primary internal factors identified in the literature that affect the provision of palliative care and are, to some extent, under the nursing home's control. The internal factors include: i) lack of care provider knowledge about the principles and practices of palliative care; ii) care provider attitudes and beliefs about death and dying; iii) staffing levels and lack of available time for dying residents; iv) lack of physician support; v) lack of privacy for residents and families; vi) families' expectations regarding residents' care; vii) hospitalisation of dying residents. Suggestions for practice, education and research are provided.

Advanced dementia research in the nursing home: the CASCADE study

Despite the growing number of persons with advanced dementia, and the need to improve their end-of-life care, few studies have addressed this important topic. The objectives of this report are to present the methodology established in the CASCADE (Choices, Attitudes, and Strategies for Care of Advanced Dementia at the End-of-Life) study, and to describe how challenges specific to this research were met. The CASCADE study is an ongoing, federally funded, 5-year prospective cohort study of nursing [nursing home (NH)] residents with advanced dementia and their health care proxies (HCPs) initiated in February 2003. Subjects were recruited from 15 facilities around Boston. The recruitment and data collection protocols are described. The demographic features, ownership, staffing, and quality of care of participant facilities are presented and compared to NHs nationwide. To date, 189 resident/HCP dyads have been enrolled. Baseline data are presented, demonstrating the success of the protocol in recruiting and repeatedly assessing NH residents with advanced dementia and their HCPs. Factors challenging and enabling implementation of the protocol are described. The CASCADE experience establishes the feasibility of conducting rigorous, multisite dementia NH research, and the described methodology serves as a detailed reference for subsequent CASCADE publications as results from the study emerge.

The challenge of providing palliative care in the nursing home: part 1 external factors

One impact of the baby boom generation and improved medical care is that nursing homes will be the place of care and site of death for growing numbers of frail, older persons dying of chronic progressive illnesses. The nursing home settings may appear to be an appropriate environment wherein residents could receive palliative care, but the literature suggests that provision of such care is replete with challenge. Some of these challenges are external to the nursing home environment and are beyond the setting's control, others have internal origins and to some extent may be under the home's control. In part I of this two-part article, we review and critically analyse the primary external factors identified in the literature -- characteristics of the residents -- as they impact on the ability of care homes to deliver palliative care.

The challenges and opportunities in providing end-of-life care in nursing homes

Approximately 20% of deaths in the United States occur in nursing homes. That percentage is expected to increase as the population continues to age. As a setting for end-of-life care, nursing homes provide both challenges and opportunities. This article examines factors that impede the delivery of high-quality end-of-life care in nursing homes, such as inadequate staff and physician training, regulatory and reimbursement issues, poor symptom management, and lack of psychosocial support for staff, residents, and families. In addition to discussing hindrances to providing end-of-life care, this article explores characteristics of nursing homes and their staff that support the care of terminally ill residents. Also included is an overview of models for delivering end-of-life care in nursing homes, including provision of hospice services, specialized palliative care units, and consultation services. Finally, this article discusses educational programs and current educational initiatives to enhance end-of-life care in nursing homes.

Investigating the educational needs of licensed nursing staff and certified nursing assistants in nursing homes regarding end-of-life care

Nursing homes care for people at the end of life (EOL). There is evidence to suggest, however, that nursing staff in these settings is often unprepared to provide a high level of EOL care. This article reports the findings from three preliminary studies that investigated the needs of licensed staff and certified nursing assistants in nursing homes regarding EOL care. The studies involved needs assessment surveys, focus group interviews with staff members, and telephone interviews with nursing home administrators. Data show that the major needs included a lack of knowledge and skills in symptom management; communication difficulties; conflicts with families and physicians; and emotional distress in dealing with time constraints and attachment to residents. Implications for nursing home staff education are described.

Late-stage dementia and participation in therapeutic activities

This study examined the participation and behavior of people with late-stage dementia during various therapeutic activities. Subjects were able to actively participate for 10 minutes or less 54% of the time. Caregivers were not responding to meet apparent resident needs 37.5% of the time. Active participation was significantly correlated with having more senses stimulated. In addition, as the length of resting time increased before a scheduled therapy, active participation significantly decreased. Subjects exhibited various behaviors during therapeutic activities. Behaviors were categorized as approaching and withdrawing, relaxing and tensing, mimicking, nonverbal connecting, and verbal connecting.