Life- and person-centred help in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany (DelpHi): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness of Collaborative Dementia Care: A Secondary Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Long-term evidence for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of collaborative dementia care management (CDCM) is lacking.

Objective

To evaluate whether 6 months of CDCM is associated with improved patient clinical outcomes and caregiver burden and is cost-effective compared with usual care over 36 months.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a prespecified secondary analysis of a general practitioner (GP)-based, cluster randomized, 2-arm clinical trial conducted in Germany from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2014, with follow-up until March 31, 2018. Participants were aged 70 years or older, lived at home, and screened positive for dementia. Data were analyzed from March 2011 to March 2018.

Intervention

The intervention group received CDCM, comprising a comprehensive needs assessment and individualized interventions by nurses specifically qualified for dementia care collaborating with GPs and health care stakeholders over 6 months. The control group received usual care.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Main outcomes were neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory [NPI]), caregiver burden (Berlin Inventory of Caregivers' Burden in Dementia [BIZA-D]), health-related quality of life (HRQOL, measured by the Quality of Life in Alzheimer Disease scale and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey [SF-12]), antidementia drug treatment, potentially inappropriate medication, and cost-effectiveness (incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) over 36 months. Outcomes between groups were compared using multivariate regression models adjusted for baseline scores.

Results

A total of 308 patients, of whom 221 (71.8%) received CDCM (mean [SD] age, 80.1 [5.3] years; 142 [64.3%] women) and 87 (28.2%) received usual care (mean [SD] age, 79.2 [4.5] years; 50 [57.5%] women), were included in the clinical effectiveness analyses, and 428 (303 [70.8%] CDCM, 125 [29.2%] usual care) were included in the cost-effectiveness analysis (which included 120 patients who had died). Participants receiving CDCM showed significantly fewer behavioral and psychological symptoms (adjusted mean difference [AMD] in NPI score, -10.26 [95% CI, -16.95 to -3.58]; P = .003; Cohen d, -0.78 [95% CI, -1.09 to -0.46]), better mental health (AMD in SF-12 Mental Component Summary score, 2.26 [95% CI, 0.31-4.21]; P = .02; Cohen d, 0.26 [95% CI, -0.11 to 0.51]), and lower caregiver burden (AMD in BIZA-D score, -0.59 [95% CI, -0.81 to -0.37]; P < .001; Cohen d, -0.71 [95% CI, -1.03 to -0.40]). There was no difference between the CDCM group and usual care group in use of antidementia drugs (adjusted odds ratio, 1.91 [95% CI, 0.96-3.77]; P = .07; Cramér V, 0.12) after 36 months. There was no association with overall HRQOL, physical health, or use of potentially inappropriate medication. The CDCM group gained QALYs (0.137 [95% CI, 0.000 to 0.274]; P = .049; Cohen d, 0.20 [95% CI, -0.09 to 0.40]) but had no significant increase in costs (437€ [-5438€ to 6313€] [US $476 (95% CI, -$5927 to $6881)]; P = .87; Cohen d, 0.07 [95% CI, -0.14 to 0.28]), resulting in a cost-effectiveness ratio of 3186€ (US $3472) per QALY. Cost-effectiveness was significantly better for patients living alone (CDCM dominated, with lower costs and more QALYs gained) than for those living with a caregiver (47 538€ [US $51 816] per QALY).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial, CDCM was associated with improved patient, caregiver, and health system-relevant outcomes over 36 months beyond the intervention period. Therefore, it should become a health policy priority to initiate translation of CDCM into routine care.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01401582.

Implementing Dementia Care Management into routine care: protocol for a cohort study in Siegen-Wittgenstein, Germany (RoutineDeCM)

INTRODUCTION

Dementia Care Management is an evidence-based model of care. It has proven its efficacy and cost-effectiveness and has been applied to different settings and different target groups. However, it is not available in routine care in Germany. The scientific evidence has influenced the National Dementia Strategy, in which one measure is to examine the possibility and requirements to implement it into routine care. The aim of this study is to implement Dementia Care Management into routine care in a selected region in Germany and evaluate the effect on participants.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

For the duration of 12 months, n=90 patients and their informal caregivers with cognitive impairment are recruited in different routine settings in primary care (general hospital, physicians' network, ambulatory nursing service, counselling service) by partners in primary care. They receive an adapted Dementia Care Management (DeCM) to the specific setting using participatory methods. DeCM is delivered by specifically qualified dementia care managers and consists of a comprehensive assessment of healthcare needs followed by algorithm-based and person-based support in healthcare planning, implementing and monitoring. The duration of the intervention is 6 months and data assessments are conducted prior to (baseline), at the end of (follow-up 1, FU1) and 6 months after the end of the intervention (follow-up 2, FU2). Primary outcomes are unmet needs at FU1 and FU2. Secondary outcomes are antidementia drug treatment, neuropsychiatric symptoms and caregiver burden at FU1 and FU2. Further outcomes are cognition, frailty and health-related quality of life. A separate process evaluation accompanies the implementation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Ethics Committee of University Medicine Greifswald, Germany, has reviewed and approved the study (registration number BB110/22). All participants provide written informed consent prior to participation. The results will be disseminated in regional workshops, press, online media and talks. They will be submitted to international peer-reviewed scientific journals for publication and presented at scientific meetings and conferences. Furthermore, results will be discussed with the funder and presented to the steering committee of the National Dementia Strategy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05529277.

[DemStepCare: Risk-stratified support for primary care-based dementia care - evaluation from general practitioner's view]

OBJECTIVE

The innovation fund project DemStepCare aimed to optimize multi-professional care through case management, risk stratification, and crisis outpatient clinic. Here, the evaluation results from the perspective of the general practitioners are presented.

METHODS

A quantitative survey was carried out at three time points regarding acceptance, benefit assessment and sensitivity to dementia of the general practitioners. In addition, qualitative interviews were conducted.

RESULTS

Satisfaction with the overall project was high. Added value and relief factors were perceived and more effective and stable dementia care was achieved through collaboration with case management. Physicians reported increased subjective competence in diagnostics and disease management.

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirm the benefit and effectiveness of DemStepCare from general practitioner's perspective.

[What prevention potential does the general practitioner setting offer for family caregivers?-findings from a qualitative interview study]

The support of people in need of care and assistance is often provided by caring relatives. General practitioners can play an important role in supporting this group, if they adapt to the problems and wishes of family caregivers.The aim of the exploratory study is to contrast care needs of family caregivers regarding the GP support with actually experienced care and, thereby, work out approaches for strengthening the GP's role.A total of 37 family caregivers were recruited via 13 internet forums focused on caregiving. Telephone interviews were conducted between September 2020 and March 2021.The majority of those interviewed consider the GP to be an important support body with a high level of competence and trust. The interviewees praise the GP's knowledge of the personal care situation, the responsiveness to a wide variety of problems and the focus on those in need of care. However, communication about the caring activity is often delayed significantly (late identification and addressing of family caregivers). GPs do not always address the needs of relatives to the same extent as they do to those in need of care. Only some of the doctors refer caregivers to offers of help and support.GPs can play a central role in supporting family caregivers. An crucial prerequisite for this is that family caregivers are recognized and involved at an early stage. In addition, it is important that GPs take into account the needs, desires and stresses of both caregivers and those being cared for. Consistent references to offers of help make it easier for family caregivers to organize care and to receive (psychosocial) support.

What influences life expectancy in people with dementia? Social support as an emerging protective factor

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the role of support from the social environment for the life expectancy in people with dementia beyond well-established individual demographic and clinical predictors over a period of up to 8 years.

METHODS

The analyses are based on data from 500 community-dwelling individuals in Germany who tested positive for dementia and were followed up for up to 8 years. Life expectancy was examined in relation to perceived social support as well as well-established socio-demographic (age, sex) and clinical predictors (cognitive status, functional status, comorbidities), using Cox regressions.

RESULTS

Greater support from the social environment reduced the risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63-0.98), with the role of emotional support being particularly important. Furthermore, higher age was associated with an increased mortality risk (HR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.05-1.11), while female sex (HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.48-0.85) and higher cognitive (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.93-0.98) and functional status (HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.86-0.97) were associated with higher life expectancy.

CONCLUSION

Our study provides novel evidence that less support from the social environment, especially emotional support, is a risk factor for shorter life expectancy in people with dementia-beyond known clinical factors. Not only the clinical and caregiving needs but also their psychosocial needs of individuals with dementia should be emphasised.

Sociodemographic and Clinical Characteristics of People Living with Dementia and Their Associations with Unmet Healthcare Needs: Insights from the Baseline Assessment of the InDePendent Study

Background

The healthcare needs of People living with Dementia (PlwD) (such as Alzheimer's disease) are often unmet. Information about the needs of community-dwelling PlwD and their association with sociodemographic and clinical characteristics is needed to fill the knowledge gap regarding factors influencing unmet needs among PlwD and to conduct a comprehensive needs assessment to develop tailored interventions.

Objective

To describe sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the InDePendent study population with particular reference to determinants of unmet needs.

Methods

We analyzed baseline data of the multi-centre cluster-randomized controlled trial (InDePendent) using descriptive statistics to describe patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and Poisson regression models to predict unmet needs, separated by sex. Data were collected personally via face-to-face interviews.

Results

Most of the n = 417 participating PlwD were mild to moderately cognitively impaired, were not depressed, had an average of 10.8 diagnoses, took 6.7 medications, and had, on average, 2.4 unmet needs (62% of PlwD had at least one unmet need) measured by the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE). Low social support, a high body-mass-index, a lower education, functional impairment, and worse health status were associated with more unmet needs, regardless of sex. In women, higher unmet needs were associated with more depressive symptoms, a poor financial situation, living alone and not being recently treated by a general practitioner. In males, unmet needs increased with the number of medications taken.

Conclusions

PlwD had a broad array of unmet healthcare needs, indicating primary healthcare provision improvement potentials. The results underscore the significance of early assessment of patient's clinical characteristics and unmet needs as a basis for individualized gender-sensible intervention strategies.∥ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04741932, Registered on February 5, 2021.

Healthcare Needs Patterns and Pattern-Predicting Factors in Dementia: Results of the Comprehensive, Computerized Unmet Needs Assessment from the Randomized, Controlled Interventional Trial InDePendent

Background

Determining unmet need patterns and associated factors in primary care can potentially specify assessment batteries and tailor interventions in dementia more efficiently.

Objective

To identify latent unmet healthcare need patterns and associated sociodemographic and clinical factors.

Methods

This Latent Class Analysis (LCA) includes n = 417 community-dwelling people living with dementia. Subjects completed a comprehensive, computer-assisted face-to-face interview to identify unmet needs. One-hundred-fifteen predefined unmet medical, medication, nursing, psychosocial, and social care needs were available. LCA and multivariate logistic regressions were performed to identify unmet needs patterns and patient characteristics belonging to a specific pattern, respectively.

Results

Four profiles were identified: [1] "few needs without any psychosocial need" (n = 44 (11%); mean: 7.4 needs), [2] "some medical and nursing care needs only" (n = 135 (32%); 9.7 needs), [3] "some needs in all areas" (n = 139 (33%); 14.3 needs), and [4] "many medical and nursing needs" (n = 99 (24%); 19.1 needs). Whereas the first class with the lowest number of needs comprised younger, less cognitively impaired patients without depressive symptoms, the fourth class had the highest number of unmet needs, containing patients with lower health status, less social support and higher comorbidity and depressive symptoms. Better access to social care services and higher social support reduced unmet needs, distinguishing the second from the third class (9.7 versus 14.3 needs).

Conclusions

Access to the social care system, social support and depressive symptoms should be assessed, and the patient's health status and comorbidities monitored to more comprehensively identify unmet needs patterns and more efficiently guide tailored interventions.

Impact of low-value medications on quality of life, hospitalization and costs - A longitudinal analysis of patients living with dementia

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to analyze the impact of low-value medications (Lvm), that is, medications unlikely to benefit patients but to cause harm, on patient-centered outcomes over 24 months.

METHODS

This longitudinal analysis was based on baseline, 12 and 24 months follow-up data of 352 patients with dementia. The impact of Lvm on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), hospitalizations, and health care costs were assessed using multiple panel-specific regression models.

RESULTS

Over 24 months, 182 patients (52%) received Lvm at least once and 56 (16%) continuously. Lvm significantly increased the risk of hospitalization by 49% (odds ratio, confidence interval [CI] 95% 1.06-2.09; p = 0.022), increased health care costs by €6810 (CI 95% -707€-14,27€; p = 0.076), and reduced patients' HRQoL (b = -1.55; CI 95% -2.76 to -0.35; p = 0.011).

DISCUSSION

More than every second patient received Lvm, negatively impacting patient-reported HRQoL, hospitalizations, and costs. Innovative approaches are needed to encourage prescribers to avoid and replace Lvm in dementia care.

HIGHLIGHTS

Over 24 months, more than every second patient received low-value medications (Lvm). Lvm negatively impact physical, psychological, and financial outcomes. Appropriate measures are needed to change prescription behaviors.

Implementation of dementia care management in routine care (RoutineDeCM): a study protocol for process evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Dementia care management is a complex intervention intended to support persons with dementia and their (caring) relatives in home-based care arrangements. Dementia care management was developed in the federal state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania in Germany and subsequently adapted for the German region of Siegen-Wittgenstein, where it will now be implemented. Four different service providers will carry out the implementation process. This study protocol describes the planned procedures for the parallel evaluation of the implementation process.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A multiple embedded case study design was chosen for the planned process evaluation. Data collection and analysis will be informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change, the Medical Research Council framework for conducting process evaluations of complex interventions and the Taxonomy of Outcomes for Implementation Research. Information (qualitative and quantitative) will be collected from all stakeholders involved in the dementia care management intervention (ie, dementia care managers, general practitioners, people with dementia).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The process evaluation is conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, the recommendations on good scientific practice, the research ethics principles of the Code of Ethics of the German Society of Nursing Science, and on the basis of ethical approval from the Clinical Ethics Committee of University Medicine Greifswald (BB 110/22). The results of the process evaluation will be disseminated through reports to the funders of the study and also as a summary of recommendations for the sustainable implementation of dementia care management for future implementers. We also plan to publish the results of this process evaluation in an international peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05529277, Registered 7 September 2022, https://beta.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/study/NCT05529277.

Impact of Hearing Aids on Progression of Cognitive Decline, Depression, and Quality of Life Among People with Cognitive Impairment and Dementia

BACKGROUND

Hearing loss is common in people with dementia (PwD) and a modifiable risk factor for cognitive decline. Recent studies revealed that hearing loss could cause social isolation and depression, which is associated with health-related quality of life (HRQoL). However, there is a lack of knowledge about the impact of the utilization of hearing aids on these outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether hearing aids use might be positively associated with the progression of cognitive function, depression, and HRQoL among PwD.

METHODS

We analyzed two-year follow-up data from 258 PwD (≥70 years, living at home). Cognitive decline was measured with Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE), depression using Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), and HRQoL with Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease Scale (QoL-AD). The impact of hearing aid utilization on the progression of outcomes was assessed using multivariate regression models.

RESULTS

123 patients had hearing loss (47.7%), from which n = 54 (43.9%) used hearing aids. Patients with hearing loss were older and had a lower HRQoL than those without hearing loss. Use of hearing aids in patients with hearing loss was associated with a lower increase in symptoms (b = -0.74, CI95 -1.46 --0.01, p = 0.047) over time as compared to those not using hearing aids. There was no effect on PwD's cognition, and the association with higher HRQoL was significant after one, but not consistently over two years.

CONCLUSION

Early detection and intervention of presbycusis using hearing aids might improve mental health and HRQoL in dementia.

Effectiveness of a self-reporting yes/no survey for dementia screening-trial in Fukui, Japan

Background: Early intervention for dementia patients is extremely important for the prevention of dementia. However, so far, it is not clear as to what kind of screening will be useful for the early detection of dementia. Objective: We aimed to investigate the relationship between the results of a short self-reporting yes/no survey selected in Kihon Checklist, developed by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare to identify older adults who are at risk of requiring support/care, and other original items developed by Dementia Prevention Team, Fukui, Japan, and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores, and determine the diagnostic efficacy of the self-reporting yes/no survey. Methods: Self-reporting yes/no surveys were conducted for 87,687 individuals aged ≥65 years, living in Fukui, Japan, and did not have Long-Term Care Insurance, Japan. According to the survey results, selected individuals were advised to visit a local hospital to be assessed with MMSE. Results: Individuals who could not make a call by looking up phone numbers and manage their own deposits and savings at the bank or automatic teller machine (ATM) had an increased risk of low MMSE score (≤23; odds ratio: 2.74 [1.89-3.97]; 95% confidence interval: 2.12 [1.46-3.07]). Conclusions: Self-reporting yes/no survey could effectively screen for dementia. Not being able to make a call by looking up phone numbers and not being able to manage their own deposits and savings at the bank or ATM are signs of dementia.

Slowing dementia symptoms - a qualitative study on attitudes and experiences of general practitioners in Germany

BACKGROUND

There is currently no cure for dementia but general practitioners (GPs) have therapeutic options available to counteract the progression of mild cognitive impairment, including drug and non-drug treatment. So far, few studies have investigated treatment strategies preferred by GPs.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to gain an overview of GPs' attitudes towards influencing the progression of dementia, their involvement regarding dementia prevention and perceived effective approaches. It also elucidated the challenges experienced by GPs and desired optimisation measures towards reinforcing secondary prevention.

METHODS

Between June 2020 and March 2021, 64 semi-standardised interviews amongst GPs were conducted in all federal states of Germany. Thirty interviews were carried out in person and 34 by phone. The data were analysed according to qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Many interviewees see great importance in secondary dementia prevention and believe they could make an effective contribution, some of them using non-drug approaches. GPs play a role in guiding patients and relatives towards support services. Some doctors consider drug treatment as the only option towards influencing the progression of dementia, showing low expectations on self-efficacy. Interdisciplinary collaboration is a frequent challenge, which often conflicts with a coherent treatment strategy.

CONCLUSION

Many GPs feel confident about influencing the progression of dementia and believe they can intervene effectively, using various (non-drug) treatment measures and referrals to support services. GPs perceive challenges, including obstacles in interdisciplinary collaboration and negative impacts after drug administration. To improve the conditions for GP intervention, it depends on expanding interdisciplinary collaboration and care strategies.

Translation of Collaborative Dementia Care Management into Different Healthcare Settings: Study Protocol for a Multicenter Implementation Trial (DCM:IMPact)

Background: Collaborative care models for people living with dementia (PwD) have been developed and evaluated, demonstrating safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness. However, these studies are based on heterogeneous study populations and primary care settings, limiting the generalizability of the results. Therefore, this study aims to implement and evaluate collaborative care across various healthcare settings and patient populations. Objective: To describe the study design of this multicenter implementation trial. Methods: This single-arm, multicenter, longitudinal implementation study will be conducted in five different healthcare settings, including 1) physicians’ networks, 2) dementia networks, 3) counselling centers, 4) hospitals, and 5) ambulatory care services. Eligibility criteria are: having a formal dementia diagnosis or having been screened positive for dementia and living community-dwelling. The staff of each healthcare setting identifies patients, informs them about the study, and invites them to participate. Participants will receive a baseline assessment followed by collaborative individualized dementia care management, comprising proven safe, effective, and cost-effective modules. Over six months, specially-qualified nurses will assess patients’ unmet needs, transfer them to individualized care plans, and address them, cooperating with various healthcare providers. A follow-up assessment is conducted six months after baseline. Approximately 60–100 PwD per setting per year are expected to participate. Differences across settings will be assessed regarding acceptability, demand, implementation success and barriers, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness. Results: We expect that acceptability, demand, implementation success and barriers, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness will vary by patients’ sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and unmet needs in each setting. Conclusion: The results will provide evidence highlighting differences in the implementation of collaborative care in various healthcare settings and demonstrating the settings with the highest need, best conditions for a successful implementation, and highest (cost-)effectiveness, as well as the population group that benefits most from collaborative care. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00025074. Registered 16 April 2021-retrospectively registered.

Comparing the psychometric properties of EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L proxy ratings by informal caregivers and a health professional for people with dementia

Background

Assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among persons with dementia poses several challenges due to cognitive decline and limited perception. As a result, proxy ratings by family members or health professionals are used. The EQ-5D is the most commonly used generic and preference-based HRQoL instrument. Methodological drawbacks of the three-level version (EQ-5D-3L) prompted the development of the five-level version (EQ-5D-5L) by expanding the range in the domains. However, no comparison of the psychometric properties of both versions and different proxy ratings exist so far. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L by application of different proxy ratings in dementia.

Methods

The EQ-5D-3L and -5L were completed by n = 52 family caregivers and one care manager at baseline and three and six months later. In total, 106 caregiver and 133 care manager proxy ratings were completed. The EQ-5D-3L and 5L were evaluated in terms of acceptability (missing values), agreement, ceiling effects, redistribution properties and inconsistency, and informativity (Shannon, H', and Shannon Evenness, J', indices) as well as convergent and discriminative validity.

Results

Mean proxy index scores were higher for the 5L than the 3L. Missing values occurred less frequently in both proxy ratings and versions (< 1%). Agreement between both measures was high but higher in caregiver than care-manager ratings (ICC 0.885 vs. 0.840). The relative ceiling effect decreased from the 3L to the 5L, more intensively in the care-manager (75%) than the caregiver rating (56%). Inconsistency between both versions was low. Informativity increased from the 3L to the 5L version, nearly equally in both proxy ratings. The 5L also demonstrated a better discriminative ability and convergent validity than the 3L, especially in the caregiver rating.

Conclusion

Compared to the EQ-5D-3L, the EQ-5D-5L had higher feasibility and acceptability and was slightly superior by a reduction of ceiling effects and an improvement in informativity, discriminative ability and convergent validity. Proxy ratings by informal caregivers overall demonstrated better psychometric properties than professional care-manager ratings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12955-022-02049-y.

Development of a Quantitative Instrument to Elicit Patient Preferences for Person-Centered Dementia Care Stage 1: A Formative Qualitative Study to Identify Patient Relevant Criteria for Experimental Design of an Analytic Hierarchy Process

Background: Person-centered care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. This formative qualitative study aimed to identify (sub)criteria of PCC for the design of a quantitative, choice-based instrument to elicit patient preferences for person-centered dementia care. Method: Interviews were conducted with n = 2 dementia care managers, n = 10 People living with Dementia (PlwD), and n = 3 caregivers (CGs), which followed a semi-structured interview guide including a card game with PCC criteria identified from the literature. Criteria cards were shown to explore the PlwD's conception. PlwD were asked to rank the cards to identify patient-relevant criteria of PCC. Audios were verbatim-transcribed and analyzed with qualitative content analysis. Card game results were coded on a 10-point-scale, and sums and means for criteria were calculated. Results: Six criteria with two sub-criteria emerged from the analysis; social relationships (indirect contact, direct contact), cognitive training (passive, active), organization of care (decentralized structures and no shared decision making, centralized structures and shared decision making), assistance with daily activities (professional, family member), characteristics of care professionals (empathy, education and work experience) and physical activities (alone, group). Dementia-sensitive wording and balance between comprehensibility vs. completeness of the (sub)criteria emerged as additional themes. Conclusions: Our formative study provides initial data about patient-relevant criteria of PCC to design a quantitative patient preference instrument. Future research may want to consider the balance between (sub)criteria comprehensibility vs. completeness.

[Transfer of Physicians' Tasks to Nurses in the Care of People with Dementia]

THE AIM OF THE STUDY

A transfer of medical activities to nurses and thus the redistribution of tasks has been discussed for almost 15 years. A legal base for model projects has been enacted. However, clearly defined tasks for substitution are still lacking. The aim of this study was to solicit opinions of general practitioners, nurses, people with dementia (PwD) and their relatives about the possibility of a large number of specific General practitioner (GP) tasks being performed by nurses in outpatient dementia care.

METHODS

A mixed-methods study with a sequential in-depth design was conducted. The analysis presented here refers to the quantitative survey of the four participant groups. 865 participants were asked about the acceptance of substitution of assessments, primary and follow-up prescriptions, health monitoring measures and other activities currently performed by physicians.

RESULTS

Across all groups of subjects, the highest level of approval for substitution was achieved for the assessment of mobility restrictions, everyday competencies, nutritional abnormalities, prescription of transportation, nursing aids, home nursing services and drawing of blood samples. Among PwD and relatives, the level of acceptance for substitution was very high. 88% of the PwD and relatives indicated that many activities can be substituted while the general practitioner remained their first point of contact. More GPs (63.2%) than nurses (56.7%) would accept the substitution.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that a large number of GPs, nurses, patients and their relatives welcome substitution. However, PwD and relatives have a significantly more positive attitude towards substitution.

Associations Between Low-Value Medication in Dementia and Healthcare Costs

BACKGROUND

Low-value medications (Lvm) provide little or no benefit to patients, may be harmful, and waste healthcare resources and costs. Although evidence from the literature indicates that Lvm is highly prevalent in dementia, evidence about the financial consequences of Lvm in dementia is limited. This study analyzed the association between receiving Lvm and healthcare costs from a public payers' perspective.

METHODS

This analysis is based on data of 516 community-dwelling people living with dementia (PwD). Fourteen Lvm were extracted from dementia-specific guidelines, the German equivalent of the Choosing Wisely campaign, and the PRISCUS list. Healthcare utilization was retrospectively assessed via face-to-face interviews with caregivers and monetarized by standardized unit costs. Associations between Lvm and healthcare costs were analyzed using multiple linear regression models.

RESULTS

Every third patient (n = 159, 31%) received Lvm. Low-value antiphlogistics, analgesics, anti-dementia drugs, sedatives and hypnotics, and antidepressants alone accounted for 77% of prescribed Lvm. PwD who received Lvm were significantly less cognitively impaired than those not receiving Lvm. Receiving Lvm was associated with higher medical care costs (b = 2959 €; 95% CI 1136-4783; p = 0.001), particularly due to higher hospitalization (b = 1911 €; 95% CI 376-3443; p = 0.015) and medication costs (b = 905 €; 95% CI 454-1357; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Lvm were prevalent, more likely occurring in the early stages of dementia, and cause financial harm for payers due to higher direct medical care costs. Further research is required to derive measures to prevent cost-driving Lvm in primary care, that is, implementing deprescribing interventions and moving health expenditures towards higher value resource use.

Tasks and Activities of an Effective Collaborative Dementia Care Management Program in German Primary Care

Background:

Recent studies have demonstrated the efficiency of collaborative dementia care, which aims to improve post-diagnostic support. However, tasks carried out of such models are currently unknown, hindering its implementation.

Objective:

To describe tasks of a collaborative model of dementia care, analyze the association between specific task subgroups and number of tasks with patients’ and caregivers’ characteristics and the impact of specific tasks on health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

Methods:

The analysis was based on 183 persons with dementia (PwD) who received dementia care management conducted by dementia-specific qualified nurses. A standardized, computer-assisted assessment was used to identify patients’ and caregivers’ unmet needs. Tasks carried out to address unmet needs were documented, categorized, and descriptively analyzed. We used multivariate regression models to identify socio-demographic and clinical factors associated with a specific subgroup of tasks or a higher number of tasks.

Results:

On average, 20.5 tasks were carried out per dyad (PwD and caregiver). 41% of tasks were categorized to cooperation with other healthcare providers, 39% to nursing care, and 19% to social support. Lower HRQoL and higher age, cognitive impairment, deficits in daily living activities, and depressive symptoms were significantly associated with a higher number of tasks. A higher number of cooperation tasks were associated with a higher gain in HRQoL.

Conclusion:

Patients’ characteristics and HRQoL significantly determine the intensity of collaborative care interventions. Variability of the intensity should be considered in developing future studies and in the implementation into routine care.

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01401582

[Team players or lone fighters? Importance and utilization of practice staff in primary care dementia detection]

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GP) face major challenges in everyday practice when it comes to identifying dementia cases as early as possible under the condition of time and resource constraints. The involvement of the practice staff promises decisive advantages in detection and diagnosis. So far, there has been a lack of studies exploring the extent to which non-medical practice employees in general practices are integrated into dementia detection, what experiences they have had and how they assess their own potential to contribute to more efficient dementia detection.

METHODS

Between August 2020 and August 2021, a total of 64 semi-structured, audio-technically recorded individual / expert interviews were conducted with non-medical practice employees (medical assistants) in general practices in all German federal states (four interviewees per federal state). The interview transcripts were evaluated using a qualitative, structuring content analysis according to Mayring (Software MAXQDA 2020).

RESULTS

The GP team members show a high degree of willingness and motivation to support the doctor in identifying and diagnosing dementia; situations have been reported where their assistance has led to an earlier identification of people with dementia. Observation and detection of dementia patients are rarely based on systematic criteria. On the whole, only some GPs entrust their staff with tasks like this. A large portion of the interviewees expressed considerable uncertainty regarding the assessment of possible signs of incipient dementia, which corresponds to the fact that only a minority of the interviewees have ever completed further training with a focus on dementia.

CONCLUSIONS

Practice staff can provide invaluable support when it comes to the timely and consistent detection of incipient dementia in general practice. In addition to sensitizing GPs and optimizing practice management, targeted training with regard to geriatric issues will be instrumental in achieving this. Accordingly, more advanced training formats should be developed that are tailored to the perspective of practice employees and convey important dementia-specific diagnostics, action and communication skills.

Prerequisites for providing effective support to family caregivers within the primary care setting - results of a study series in Germany

Background

General Practitioners are considered to be well placed to monitor home-care settings and to respond specifically to family caregivers. To do this, they must be sensitive to the needs and expectations of caregivers. In order to determine the current status of GP care in terms of the support given to family caregivers, a series of studies were conducted to gather the perspectives of both caregivers and GPs. The results are used to derive starting points as to which measures would be sensible and useful to strengthen support offered to family caregivers in the primary care setting.

Methods

Between 2020 and 2021, three sub-studies were conducted: a) an online survey of 612 family caregivers; b) qualitative interviews with 37 family caregivers; c) an online survey of 3556 GPs.

Results

Family caregivers see GPs as a highly skilled and trustworthy central point of contact; there are many different reasons for consulting them on the subject of care. In the perception of caregivers, particular weaknesses in GP support are the absence of signposting to advisory and assistance services and, in many cases, the failure to involve family caregivers in good time. At the same time, GPs do not always have sufficient attention to the physical and psychological needs of family caregivers. The doctors interviewed consider the GP practice to be well suited to being a primary point of contact for caregivers, but recognise that various challenges exist. These relate, among other things, to the timely organisation of appropriate respite services, targeted referral to support services or the early identification of informal caregivers.

Conclusions

GP practices can play a central role in supporting family caregivers. Caregivers should be approached by the practice team at an early stage and consistently signposted to help and support services. In order to support care settings successfully, it is important to consider the triadic constellation of needs, wishes and stresses of both the caregiver and the care recipient. More training and greater involvement of practice staff in the support and identification of caregivers seems advisable.

[General practitioners, attitudes, procedures and challenges towards supporting family caregivers - results of a survey of primary care physicians]

BACKGROUND

 General practitioners are considered to be well suited when it comes to addressing the information and care needs of family caregivers. The aim of the present study is to examine how general practitioners assess their possibilities to support caregivers, what priorities they set and to what extent they experience challenges.

METHODS AND PARTICIPANTS

 In the course of an online survey with a postal cover letter, a total of 3,556 GPs in in Baden-Württemberg, Hesse and Rhineland-Palatinate were interviewed between February and June 2021. Due to the exploratory approach of the study, only a descriptive data analysis was carried out.

RESULTS

 68 % of the GPs surveyed often deal with family caregivers in everyday practice; 77 % consider the GP's office to be well suited as the primary point of contact for family caregivers and care coordination. Often it is caregiving relatives who ask the GP about the issue of care (89 %). Frequent contents concern a deterioration in the care situation (75 %) and a change in the need for care (84 %); consultations in the initial phase of care are less common (40 %). There are differences between urban and rural doctors in the perception of the needs of caregivers and the setting of priorities. Rural doctors give more weight to proactive and psychosocial care, whereas doctors in urban regions rely on the specialist and support network. GPs experience various challenges while supporting caregivers, including the timely organization of suitable relief offers (87 %), the referral to suitable offers of help (79 %) or the early identification of informal caregivers (59 %).

DISCUSSION

 GPs can play a central role in supporting family caregivers. A crucial prerequisite for this is that family caregivers are recognized and involved at an early stage. Consistent references to offers of help make it easier for family caregivers to organize care and to receive (psychosocial) support. In addition, it is important that GPs take into account the needs, desires and stresses of both caregivers and those being cared for.

Needs of patients with dementia and their caregivers in primary care: lessons learned from the Alzheimer plan of Quebec

BACKGROUND

Persons living with dementia have various health and social care needs and expectations, some which are not fully met by health providers, including primary care clinicians. The Quebec Alzheimer plan, implemented in 2014, aimed to cover these needs, but there is no research on the effect this plan had on the needs and expectations of persons living with dementia. The objective of this study is to identify persons living with dementia and caregivers' met and unmet needs and to describe their experience.

METHODS

This is a sequential mixed methods explanatory design: Phase 1: cross-sectional study to describe the met and unmet health and social care needs of community-dwelling persons living with dementia using Camberwell Assessment of Need of the Elderly and Carers' Assessment for Dementia tools. Phase 2: qualitative descriptive study to explore and understand the experiences of persons living with dementia and caregivers with the use of social and healthcare services, using semi-structured interviews. Data from phase 1 was analyzed with descriptive statistics, and from phase 2, with inductive thematic analysis. Results from phases 1 and 2 were compared, contrasted and interpreted together.

RESULTS

The mean total number of needs reported by the patients was 5.03 (4.48 and 0.55 met and unmet needs, respectively). Caregivers had 0.52 met needs (3.16 unmet needs). The main needs for both were memory, physical health, eyesight/hearing/communication, medication, looking after home, money/budgeting. Three categories were mentioned by the participants: Persons living with dementia and caregiver's attitude towards memory decline, their perception of community health services and of the family medicine practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirms the findings of other studies on the most common unmet needs of the patients and caregivers that are met partially or not at all. In addition, the participants were satisfied with access to care, and medical services in primary practices, being confident in their family. Our results indicate persons living with dementia and their caregivers need a contact person, a clear explanation of their dementia diagnosis, a care plan, written information on available services, and support for the caregivers.

Psychometric Properties of EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in Cognitively Impaired Patients Living with Dementia

BACKGROUND

Assessing health-related quality of life in dementia poses challenges due to patients' cognitive impairment. It is unknown if the newly introduced EQ-5D five-level version (EQ-5D-5L) is superior to the 3-level version (EQ-5D-3L) in this cognitively impaired population group.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in comparison to the EQ-5D-3L in patients living with dementia (PwD).

METHODS

The EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L were assessed via interviews with n = 78 PwD at baseline and three and six months after, resulting in 131 assessments. The EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L were evaluated in terms of acceptability, agreement, ceiling effects, redistribution properties and inconsistency, informativity as well as convergent and discriminative validity.

RESULTS

Mean index scores were higher for the EQ-5D-5L than the EQ-5D-3L (0.70 versus 0.64). Missing values occurred more frequently in the EQ-5D-5L than the EQ-5D-3L (8%versus 3%). Agreement between both measures was acceptable but poor in PwD with moderate to severe cognitive impairment. The index value's relative ceiling effect decreased from EQ-5D-3L to EQ-5D-5L by 17%. Inconsistency was moderate to high (13%). Absolute and relative informativity increased in the EQ-5D-5L compared to the 3L. The EQ-5D-5L demonstrated a lower discriminative ability and convergent validity, especially in PwD with moderate to severe cognitive deficits.

CONCLUSION

The EQ-5D-5L was not superior as a self-rating instrument due to a lower acceptability and discriminative ability and a high inconsistency, especially in moderate to severe dementia. The EQ-5D-3L had slightly better psychometric properties and should preferably be used as a self-rating instrument in economic evaluations in dementia.

Prevalence of Low-Value Care and Its Associations with Patient-Centered Outcomes in Dementia

Background:

Low-value care (LvC) is defined as care unlikely to provide a benefit to the patient regarding the patient’s preferences, potential harms, costs, or available alternatives. Avoiding LvC and promoting recommended evidence-based treatments, referred to as high-value care (HvC), could improve patient-reported outcomes for people living with dementia (PwD).

Objective:

This study aims to determine the prevalence of LvC and HvC in dementia and the associations of LvC and HvC with patients’ quality of life and hospitalization.

Methods:

The analysis was based on data of the DelpHi trial and included 516 PwD. Dementia-specific guidelines, the “Choosing Wisely” campaign and the PRISCUS list were used to indicate LvC and HvC treatments, resulting in 347 LvC and HvC related recommendations. Of these, 77 recommendations (51 for LvC, 26 for HvC) were measured within the DelpHi-trial and finally used for this analysis. The association of LvC and HvC treatments with PwD health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and hospitalization was assessed using multiple regression models.

Results:

LvC was highly prevalent in PwD (31%). PwD receiving LvC had a significantly lower quality of life (b = –0.07; 95% CI –0.14 – –0.01) and were significantly more likely to be hospitalized (OR = 2.06; 95% CI 1.26–3.39). Different HvC treatments were associated with both positive and negative changes in HRQoL.

Conclusion:

LvC could cause adverse outcomes and should be identified as early as possible and tried to be replaced. Future research should examine innovative models of care or treatment pathways supporting the identification and replacement of LvC in dementia.

Effectiveness of a digitally supported care management programme to reduce unmet needs of family caregivers of people with dementia: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial (GAIN)

Background

Up to two-thirds of dementia care is provided by family caregivers who often experience high burden, little support and adverse health outcomes. Enabling and supporting family caregivers to provide care at home prevents early institutionalisation of the person with dementia and alleviates the economic burden of dementia in the long term. General practitioners (GPs), as the first point of contact, have a key role in identifying and managing burden and care needs of family caregivers. However, in routine care, this opportunity is often limited by time constraints and even if caregiver needs are recognised, detailed information about regionally available support and advice on healthcare services is often lacking.

Methods

This is a cluster randomised, controlled trial investigating the clinical use and cost-effectiveness of a digitally supported care management programme for caregivers of people with dementia (PwD). Five hundred family caregivers will be randomised at GP offices, specialist practices and memory clinics, with about n=250 participants per arm. Participants are eligible if they are the primary family caregiver of a PwD, are at least 18 years of age and provide informed consent. Participants in the intervention group will receive an individualised care management plan, which will be carried out by qualified study nurses in collaboration with the treating GP. All participants will receive a baseline assessment and a 6-months follow-up assessment. Participants in the wait-list control group will receive usual care. Starting at the 6 months’ follow-up, the former controls will also receive an individualised management plan. Primary outcomes are the number of unmet needs (incl. the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly, CANE) and health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include caregiver burden (Zarit Burden Interview, ZBI), social support (Lubben Social Network Scale, LSNS), the use of medical and non-medical services (Questionnaire for the Use of Medical and Non-Medical Services, FIMA) and resource utilisation (Resource Utilisation in Dementia, RUD). The primary analysis will be based on intention-to-treat. Between- and within-group analyses and a cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted to estimate the effect of the tablet PC-based care management programme. This trial is funded by the German Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) Innovation Fund.

Discussion

The findings of this trial will be useful in informing and improving current healthcare system structures and processes to support family dementia caregivers within routine care practices.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04037501. Registered on 30 July 2019.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05290-w.

Types of leisure time physical activities (LTPA) of community-dwelling persons who have been screened positive for dementia

Background

To (a) describe the pattern of leisure time physical activities (LTPA) in community-dwelling persons who have been screened positive for dementia and (b) determine the health-related and sociodemographic factors associated with LTPA.

Methods

Data of the general practitioner-based, randomized, controlled intervention trial, DelpHi-MV (Dementia: life- and person-centered help in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania) were used. Patients aged 70 years or older, who lived at home and had a DemTect< 9 were informed about the study by their General practitioners and invited to participate. Data from 436 participants with complete baseline data were used. Standardized, computer-assisted assessments were made during face-to-face interviews at the participants’ homes.

Results

Two hundred thirty-eight patients (54.6%) carried out LTPA (men 58.4%, women 51.8%). Physically active patients mentioned one to two different activities; diversity of LTPA was higher for men than for women. The most-frequently mentioned types of activity were gardening (35.3%), cycling (24.1%) and mobility training (12.4%); there was only a statistically significant difference between men and women in cycling, χ²(1) = 21.47, p < .001. The odds of LTPA increased with increasing quality of life (OR = 2.41), lower impairments in activities of daily living (OR = 0.85), and living in a rural environment (OR = 2.02).

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that people who have been screened positive for dementia living in a rural area are more likely to be active than people living in an urban area. Following studies should investigate whether this difference has an effect on the progression of dementia.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier NCT01401582.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02201-1.

Recruiting general practitioners and patients with dementia into a cluster randomised controlled trial: strategies, barriers and facilitators

Background

Recruitment of general practitioners (GPs) and their patients is reported as one of the most challenging steps when undertaking primary care research. The present paper describes the recruitment process of a cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) aiming to improve dementia care in the primary care setting.

Methods

Recruitment data was analysed descriptively using frequency tables to investigate comparisons of recruitment rates and results of different recruitment strategies as well as reasons for participation and non-participation of GPs, patients with dementia (PwD) and their caregivers.

Results

Over a period of 23 months, N = 28 GPs were successfully included in the cRCT. This represents an overall recruitment rate of 4.6%. The most efficient strategy in terms of high response and low labour-intensity involved the dissemination of calls for participation in a GP research network. Most frequently reported reasons for GP’s participation were Improvement of patient’s well-being (n = 22, 79%) followed by Interest in dementia research (n = 18, 64%). The most common reasons for non-participation were Lack of time (n = 71, 34%) followed by Not interested in participation (n = 63, 30%). On a patient level, N = 102 PwD were successfully recruited. On average, each GP referred about n = 7 PwD (range: 1–17; mdn = 6; IQR = 3.5) and successfully recruited about n = 4 PwD (range: 1–11; mdn = 3; IQR = 3.5).

Conclusion

First, our findings propose GP research networks as a promising strategy to promote recruitment and participation of GPs and their patients in research. Second, present findings highlight the importance of including GPs and their interests in specific research topics in early stages of research in order to ensure a successful recruitment. Finally, results do not support cold calls as a successful strategy in the recruitment of GPs.

Trial registration

The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry (Trial registration number: ISRCTN15854413). Registered 01 April 2019.

Support, needs and expectations of family caregivers regarding general practitioners - results from an online survey

Background

Family caregivers are often the first line of support for people requiring care; although they may personally stand to benefit, these activities substantially increase the risk of physical and emotional stress. General practitioners (GPs) may provide important support and stabilisation, but need to adjust to the needs and expectations of this group in order to do so. The aim of the study was to compare the needs of family caregivers from GPs to the support they actually experience. Additional aims included determining the main factors affecting satisfaction amongst family caregivers with support from GPs. The results were used to develop possible approaches towards optimisation within the purview of general medical practice.

Methods

Between January and July 2020, 612 people supporting or caring for a family member responded to an online survey posted in seventeen internet forums focused on family caregivers. In addition to the descriptive analysis, a t-test with independent samples was used to identify significant differences between two groups. We also used binary logistic regression analysis to identify indications of potentially influential factors regarding the experienced support from GPs.

Results

Around three out of every four respondents (72%) consulted GPs in care matters. The respondents gave positive responses on their GP’s knowledge of the care situation (71%), approachability in various issues connecting with care and service towards the caregiver (82%). GPs’ efforts in meeting the needs and requirements of the care recipient were also rated positively (82%). Weaknesses in support from GPs mainly involved the lack of information on advice and assistance services (55%) as well as frequently not identifying or involving caregivers as such soon enough (42%). Results from regression analysis show that the last two aspects play a major role in subjective satisfaction amongst family caregivers with support from GPs.

Conclusions

We recommend that GPs undergo further training to reinforce awareness that the care triad of needs, requirements and stresses amongst family caregivers also plays a vital role in care outcomes. With this in mind, general practice staff should adopt a pre-emptive strategy towards approaching family members about potential issues and informing them about existing assistance and support services.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01381-4.

Factors influencing general practitioners' perception of and attitude towards dementia diagnostics and care-results of a survey among primary care physicians in Germany

Studies have shown that primary care is not always effective when it comes to caring for people with dementia. In addition, general practitioners do not always use diagnostic instruments consistently. The aim of the study was to identify relevant factors that influence general practitioners’ attitudes and willingness with respect to consistent diagnosis and care. For this purpose, resources, viewpoints, and behavioral patterns of general practitioners with regard to dementia diagnostics as well as common challenges in everyday practice were recorded. In the course of a survey, a total of 2266 general practitioners in Hesse and Baden-Württemberg were interviewed between January and March 2020. In addition to the descriptive analysis, a t-test was used to determine significant differences between two groups. A univariate linear regression analysis was carried out to identify possible influencing factors. 81% of the respondents do provide dementia diagnostics; 51% are involved in the treatment. Most of them see the diagnostic work-up (77%), communication and compliance problems (73%), as well as the therapeutic support (71%) as common challenges. In addition, there are interface problems regarding the interdisciplinary cooperation. Some of the respondents express doubts about the value of early detection (41%). The general practitioners’ attitude with respect to dementia diagnostics and care is determined by influencing factors that relate to geriatric competencies, expectations of self-efficacy, the integration of practice staff, as well as the knowledge of and cooperation with counseling and care services. It seems advisable to strengthen the geriatric competence of general practitioners. Moreover, it appears essential to educate general practitioners more about support structures in the field of dementia care and to integrate them accordingly. In addition, practice staff should be more systematically involved in the identification and care of dementia patients.

The situation of elderly with cognitive impairment living at home during lockdown in the Corona-pandemic in Germany

BACKGROUND

The outbreak of the Corona virus is a challenge for health care systems worldwide. The aim of this study is to analyze a) knowledge about, and feelings related to the Corona-pandemic. Describe b) loneliness, depression and anxiety and, c) the perceived, immediate impact of the lockdown on frequency of social contacts and quality of health care provision of people with cognitive impairment during social distancing and lockdown in the primary care system and living at home in Germany.

METHODS

This analysis is based on data of a telephone-based assessment in a convenience sample of n = 141 people with known cognitive impairment in the primary care setting. Data on e.g. cognitive and psychological status prior to the pandemic was available. Attitudes, knowledge about and perceived personal impact of the pandemic, social support, loneliness, anxiety, depression, change in the frequency of social activities due to the pandemic and perceived impact of the pandemic on health care related services were assessed during the time of lockdown.

RESULTS

The vast majority of participants are sufficiently informed about Corona (85%) and most think that the measures taken are appropriate (64%). A total of 11% shows one main symptom of a depression according to DSM-5. The frequency of depressive symptoms has not increased between the time before pandemic and lockdown in almost all participants. The sample shows minimal (65.0%) or low symptoms of anxiety (25%). The prevalence of loneliness is 10%. On average seven activities have decreased in frequency due to the pandemic. Social activities related to meeting people, dancing or visiting birthdays have decreased significantly. Talking with friends by phone and activities like gardening have increased. Utilization of health care services like day clinics, relief services and prescribed therapies have been reported to have worsened due to the pandemic. Visits to general practitioners decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

The study shows a small impact of the pandemic on psychological variables like depression, anxiety and loneliness in the short-term in Germany. There is a decrease in social activities as expected. The impact on health care provision is prominent. There is a need for qualitative, in-depth studies to further interpret the results.

Attitudes towards advanced nursing roles in primary dementia care - Results of an observational study in Germany

AIMS

To demonstrate the attitudes of general practitioners (GPs), nurses, persons with dementia, and caregiver towards suitable tasks and qualification needs for and the acceptance and impact of advanced nursing roles in German dementia primary care.

DESIGN

Observational study using a questionnaire survey with 225 GPs, 232 nurses, 211 persons with dementia, and 197 caregivers, conducted between December 2017-August 2018.

METHODS

A questionnaire was generated that includes specific assessment, prescription, and monitoring tasks of advanced nursing roles in dementia primary care as well as qualification requirements for and the acceptance and the impact of advanced nursing roles. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Group differences were assessed using the Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Advanced nursing roles were highly appreciated across all groups. Assessment and monitoring tasks were rated as highly suitable, and prescription authorities as moderately suitable. Nurses felt less confident in assessment and monitoring, but more confident in prescribing as practitioners expected. Patients and caregivers would appreciate a takeover of tasks by nurses; nurses and practitioners preferred a delegation. A dementia-specific qualification was rated as best suitable for advanced nursing roles, followed by 'no specific qualification' if medical tasks that only can be carried out by practitioners were delegated and an academic degree if tasks were substituted. Advanced nursing roles were rated as beneficial, strengthening the confidence in nursing care and improving the cooperation between professionals and the treatment. Practitioners assumed that advanced nursing roles would improve job satisfaction of nurses, which was not confirmed by nurses.

CONCLUSION

There is an extended consensus towards the enlargement of advanced nursing roles, represented by high endorsement, acceptance, and willingness to reorganize tasks.

IMPACT

Results debunk the common notion that German practitioners would be reluctant towards advanced nursing roles and a takeover of current practitioner tasks, supporting the implementation of advanced nursing roles in Germany.

Dementia in People with a Turkish Migration Background: Experiences and Utilization of Healthcare Services

BACKGROUND

As the proportion of older people with migration background (PwM) increases, the proportion of older PwM with dementia might also increase. Dementia is underdiagnosed in this group and a large proportion of PwM with dementia and family caregivers are not properly supported. Healthcare utilization is lower among older migrant populations. Thus, a better understanding of how PwM and family caregivers perceive their situation and how they experience healthcare services is needed to improve utilization of the healthcare system.

OBJECTIVE

Analyze how family caregivers of PwM with dementia experience their situation, why healthcare services are utilized less often, and what can be done to reverse this.

METHODS

Eight semi-structured interviews were conducted with people with Turkish migration background caring for PwM with dementia. Qualitative content analysis was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Daily care was performed by one family member with the support of others. Healthcare services were used by most participants. Participants identified a need for better access to relevant information and incorporation of Turkish culture into healthcare services.

CONCLUSION

PwM face similar challenges in taking care of persons with dementia as those without migration background. There is a willingness to use services, and services embracing Turkish culture would help to reduce hesitance and make affected people feel more comfortable, thereby increasing utilization and satisfaction. A limitation of this study is that participants were already connected to health services, which may not reflect the help-seeking behavior of those in the Turkish community who are not involved in healthcare.

What is the role of the practice nurse in the care of people living with dementia, or cognitive impairment, and their support person(s)?: a systematic review

Background

The potential value of expanding the Practice Nurse role to include the recognition and management of dementia has been acknowledged. Practice Nurses are well-positioned to provide comprehensive dementia information and support so that people living with dementia are better equipped to self-manage their health and live well with dementia. The purpose of this review was to systematically examine published literature to identify existing and potential roles of Practice Nurse’s in the delivery of care to people affected by dementia and to describe the characteristics and effectiveness of nurse interventions in dementia models of care.

Methods

The PRISMA statement guided the systematic review of the quantitative and qualitative evidence for roles and characteristics of the Practice Nurse in the delivery of dementia care. A comprehensive literature search of seven electronic databases and Google scholar identified relevant original research published in English between January 2000 and January 2019. Thirteen articles met the inclusion criteria and were extracted into the Covidence software for analysis.

Results

The heterogeneity of the included studies purpose, design and outcomes measures and the diversity in health systems and primary care nurses scope of practice made it difficult to synthesise the findings and draw conclusions. The heterogeneity did, however, provide important insights into the characteristics of roles undertaken by nurses working in the general practice setting, which were potentially beneficial to people living with dementia and their support person. These included patient accessibility to the Practice Nurse, early recognition and management of cognitive changes, care management and collaboration with the General Practitioner. Limitations of the provision of dementia care by Practice Nurses included a lack of definition of the role, inadequate dementia specific training, time constraints and poor communication with General Practitioners.

Conclusions

Embedding an evidence-based model that describes the role of the Practice Nurse in dementia care provision has the potential to increase early recognition of cognitive impairment and more appropriate primary care management of dementia.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018088191.

Is the whole larger than the sum of its parts? Impact of missing data imputation in economic evaluation conducted alongside randomized controlled trials

Outcomes in economic evaluations, such as health utilities and costs, are products of multiple variables, often requiring complete item responses to questionnaires. Therefore, missing data are very common in cost-effectiveness analyses. Multiple imputations (MI) are predominately recommended and could be made either for individual items or at the aggregate level. We, therefore, aimed to assess the precision of both MI approaches (the item imputation vs. aggregate imputation) on the cost-effectiveness results. The original data set came from a cluster-randomized, controlled trial and was used to describe the missing data pattern and compare the differences in the cost-effectiveness results between the two imputation approaches. A simulation study with different missing data scenarios generated based on a complete data set was used to assess the precision of both imputation approaches. For health utility and cost, patients more often had a partial (9% vs. 23%, respectively) rather than complete missing (4% vs. 0%). The imputation approaches differed in the cost-effectiveness results (the item imputation: - 61,079€/QALY vs. the aggregate imputation: 15,399€/QALY). Within the simulation study mean relative bias (< 5% vs. < 10%) and range of bias (< 38% vs. < 83%) to the true incremental cost and incremental QALYs were lower for the item imputation compared to the aggregate imputation. Even when 40% of data were missing, relative bias to true cost-effectiveness curves was less than 16% using the item imputation, but up to 39% for the aggregate imputation. Thus, the imputation strategies could have a significant impact on the cost-effectiveness conclusions when more than 20% of data are missing. The item imputation approach has better precision than the imputation at the aggregate level.

Identifying Unmet Needs of Family Dementia Caregivers: Results of the Baseline Assessment of a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Intervention Trial

BACKGROUND

Caregivers providing informal care for people with dementia (PwD) often report unmet needs, burden, and health impairments. Optimal support for family dementia caregivers will likely benefit from better understanding and assessment of the prevalence and types of caregivers' unmet needs and associated socio-demographic and clinical characteristics.

OBJECTIVE

The present study investigates 1) the number and types of caregivers' unmet needs, 2) socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of both PwD and caregivers, and 3) caregivers' burden and health-related outcomes that are related to caregivers' unmet needs.

METHODS

The present analyses are based on cross-sectional data of n = 226 dyads of caregivers and their community-dwelling PwD participating in a comprehensive standardized, computer-based caregivers' needs assessment within a general practitioner (GP)-based, cluster-randomized intervention trial.

RESULTS

A total of n = 505 unmet needs were identified for n = 171 caregivers from the intervention group at baseline. Only 24.3% caregivers reported no unmet need (n = 55), whereas 75.7% caregivers had at least one unmet need (n = 171). Caregivers had on average 2.19 unmet needs (mean = 2.19, SD = 2.15). Specifically, 53.1% of caregivers had one up to three unmet needs (n = 120), 18.6% (n = 42) had three up to six unmet needs, and 4.0% (n = 9) had more than six unmet needs.

DISCUSSION

Our results underline the importance of a comprehensive needs assessment for family dementia caregivers to develop and implement concepts that can provide family dementia caregivers with optimal support.

Emerging Collaborative Care Models for Dementia Care in the Primary Care Setting: A Narrative Review

The rapidly increasing population living with dementia presents a unique economic and public health challenge. However, primary care physicians, despite their position as first-line providers, often lack the time, support, and training to systematically screen for, diagnose, and treat dementia, as well as provide adequate psychosocial support to unpaid caregivers. Models of collaborative care, which have found success in reducing symptom severity and increasing quality of life for other chronic illnesses, have been studied for feasibility, efficacy, and cost effectiveness in treating individuals with dementia and supporting caregivers. A review of initial data from several models suggests that enrollment in a collaborative care program for dementia is associated with benefits such as reduction in behavioral symptoms of dementia, improved functioning and quality of life, less frequent utilization of acute medical services, and decrease in caregiver burden. These evidence-based models, if implemented widely, stand to facilitate delivery of highly effective dementia care while reducing associated total medical expense. In this narrative review, we examine the key components of collaborative care teams, summarize outcomes of prior studies and discuss barriers and opportunities for wider dissemination of collaborative care models that are partnered with and/or based within primary care settings.

Why do family dementia caregivers reject caregiver support services? Analyzing types of rejection and associated health-impairments in a cluster-randomized controlled intervention trial

Background

Although there are a number of support services accessible for most family dementia caregivers, many caregivers reject available and affordable support. Previous research suggests that rejections of support services may result from insufficient fit of available services with caregivers’ unmet needs and a lack of acknowledgement of caregivers’ unmet needs and associated support services. The present study investigates (a) the number, proportion and types of caregivers’ rejection on recommended tailored support, (b) socio-demographic and clinical determinants of caregiver’s rejection of both people with dementia (PwD) and caregivers, and (c) caregivers’ health-related variables related to caregivers’ rejection.

Methods

Caregivers’ rejection of tailored support services was identified based on a standardized, computerized unmet needs assessment conducted by dementia-specific qualified nurses. The present analysis is based on data of n = 226 dyads of caregivers and their community-dwelling PwD who participated in a general practitioner (GP)-based, cluster-randomized intervention trial. The trial was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Chamber of Physicians of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, registry number BB 20/11. Data analyses were conducted using Stata/IC 13.1. We conducted Welch’s t-test, Pearson’s product-moment correlation, and conditional negative binomial regression models with random effects for GP to account for over-dispersed count data.

Results

In sum, n = 505 unmet needs were identified and the same number of tailored recommendations were identified for n = 171 family dementia caregivers from the intervention group at baseline. For n = 55 family dementia caregivers not a single unmet need and recommendation were identified. A total of 17.6% (n = 89) of the recommendations were rejected by caregivers. Rejection rates of caregivers differed by type of recommendation. Whereas caregivers’ rejection rate on recommendations concerning mental health (3.6%), physical health (2.5%), and social, legal, and financial affairs (0%) were low, caregivers’ rejection rates concerning social integration (especially caregiver supporting groups) was high (71.7%). Thus, the rejections of family dementia caregivers are mainly linked to the delegation to caregiver supporting groups. Caregivers’ rejections were mainly related to personal factors of caregivers (n = 66), service-related factors (n = 6), relational factors (n = 1), and other factors (n = 17).

Furthermore, our results showed that the number of caregivers’ rejections was associated with a higher functional status of the PwD and are mainly associated with the rejection of caregiver supporting groups. Thus, caregivers visit supporting groups more often when the PwD shows low abilities in activities of daily living. Importantly, this is independent of the status of cognition and depression of the PwD as well as the physical and mental health of the family dementia caregivers.

Conclusions

Our results underline the importance of understanding factors that determine caregivers’ rejection of support services. These need to be specifically addressed in tailored solutions for caregivers’ support services.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01401582 (date: July 25, 2011, prospective registered).

Who Benefits Most from Collaborative Dementia Care from a Patient and Payer Perspective? A Subgroup Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

Dementia care management (DCM) aims to provide optimal treatment for people with dementia (PwD). Treatment and care needs are dependent on patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and thus, economic outcomes could depend on such characteristics.

OBJECTIVE

To detect important subgroups that benefit most from DCM and for which a significant effect on cost, QALY, and the individual cost-effectiveness could be achieved.

METHODS

The analysis was based on 444 participants of the DelpHi-trial. For each subgroup, the probability of DCM being cost-effective was calculated and visualized using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. The impact of DCM on individual costs and QALYs was assessed by using multivariate regression models with interaction terms.

RESULTS

The probability of DCM being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay of 40,000€ /QALY was higher in females (96% versus 16% for males), in those living alone (96% versus 26% for those living not alone), in those being moderately to severely cognitively (100% versus 3% for patients without cognitive impairment) and functionally impaired (97% versus 16% for patients without functional impairment), and in PwD having a high comorbidity (96% versus 26% for patients with a low comorbidity). Multivariate analyses revealed that females (b = -10,873; SE = 4,775, p = 0.023) who received the intervention had significantly lower healthcare cost. DCM significantly improved QALY for PwD with mild and moderate cognitive (b = +0.232, SE = 0.105) and functional deficits (b = +0.200, SE = 0.095).

CONCLUSION

Patients characteristics significantly affect the cost-effectiveness. Females, patients living alone, patients with a high comorbidity, and those being moderately cognitively and functionally impaired benefit most from DCM. For those subgroups, healthcare payers could gain the highest cost savings and the highest effects on QALYs when DCM will be implemented.

Drug-Related Problems Increase Healthcare Costs for People Living with Dementia

BACKGROUND

Drug-related problems (DRP) are common in the elderly population, especially in people living with dementia (PwD). DRP are associated with adverse outcomes that could result in increased costs.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to analyze the association between DRP and healthcare costs in PwD.

METHODS

The analysis was based on the cross-sectional data of 424 PwD. Compliance, adverse effects, and drug administration of prescribed and over-the-counter drugs taken were assessed. DRP were identified and classified by pharmacists using an adapted German version of "PIE-Doc®". Healthcare utilization was assessed retrospectively used to calculated costs from a public payer perspective using standardized unit costs. The associations between DRP and healthcare costs were analyzed using multiple linear regression models.

RESULTS

394 PwD (93%) had at least one DRP. An inappropriate drug choice was significantly associated with increased total costs (b = 2,718€; CI95% 1,448-3,988) due to significantly higher costs for hospitalization (b = 1,936€; 670-3,202) and for medications (b = 417€; 68-765). Problems with medication dosage and drug interactions were significantly associated with higher medication costs (b = 679€; 31-1,328; and b = 630€; 259-1,001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

DRP could significantly lead to adverse outcomes for PwD and healthcare payers, reflected by a higher hospitalization and costs, respectively. Further research is needed to clarify on interventions and approaches efficiently avoiding DRP and on the effect on patient-reported and economic outcomes.

Dementia diagnostics in general practitioner care : Do general practitioners have reservations? The findings of a qualitative study in Germany

General practitioner (GP) treatment of dementia is often criticized as being ineffective and not implemented consistently enough. The causes and specific standpoints of GPs have not previously been thoroughly investigated. This paper focuses on the reasons and the criticisms levelled at GPs with regard to diagnosing dementia, and identifies approaches to enable optimization. The analysis is based on 41 semi-structured interviews with GPs in Hesse, Germany, in 2018. During the course of a content analysis, the interviewees’ attitudes and behavioral patterns towards dementia diagnostics were to be analyzed. The results of the study show various challenges and problems of primary care in this field. The majority of the sample showed skepticism and reluctance with regard to the diagnosis of dementia. Six key problem areas were extracted from the interviews, which can be seen as root causes for the distance kept by GPs: 1) early delegation of patients due to role understanding, 2) attitude of pessimism towards dementia, 3) differential diagnosis perceived as an obstacle, 4) insufficient remuneration, 5) fear of patient stigmatization, and 6) lack of application. Some GPs demonstrated personal initiative with the aim of optimizing dementia diagnostics. Three approaches can be derived which could be used to improve the GP-based care of dementia: 1) self-efficacy, 2) differential diagnostics and treatment pathways, and 3) physician–patient communication.

Can non-pharmacological interventions reduce hospital admissions in people with dementia? A systematic review

Background

People with dementia who are admitted to hospital have worse outcomes than those without dementia. Identifying interventions that could reduce the risk of hospitalisation in people with dementia has the potential to positively impact on lives of people with dementia. This review aimed to investigate whether there are non-pharmacological interventions that successfully reduce hospitalisation risk, length of stay and mortality in people with dementia.

Methods

7 electronic databases and trial registries were searched from inception to October 2018. We included randomised controlled trials that evaluated non-pharmacological interventions in out of hospital settings and targeted people with any type of dementia. All stages of the review process were performed by two reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We grouped studies based on intervention: care management, counselling/self-help, enhanced GP services or memory clinics, and physiotherapy or occupational therapy. Data were pooled within intervention categories using random effects meta-analysis.

Results

There was no evidence that any of the intervention categories were associated with reduced hospital admission or mortality. There was very weak evidence to suggest that care management interventions (mean difference, MD, -0.16, 95% CI -0.32, 0.01), physiotherapy/occupational therapy (MD -0.16, 95% CI -0.36, 0.03) and enhanced GP/memory clinics (MD -0.14, 95% CI -0.31, 0.03) were associated with small reductions in hospital stay. There was no evidence for an effect of counselling/self-help interventions on length of hospital stay.

Conclusions

Current evidence from randomised trials suggests no clear benefit or harm associated with any of interventions on risks of hospitalisation, duration of hospitalisation or death. Further research with the primary aim to reduce hospitalisation in people with dementia is required.

Supporting elderly people with cognitive impairment during and after hospital stays with intersectoral care management: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The sectorization of health-care systems leads to inefficient treatment, especially for elderly people with cognitive impairment. The transition from hospital care to primary care is insufficiently coordinated, and communication between health-care providers is often lacking. Consequences include a further deterioration of health, higher rates of hospital readmissions, and institutionalization. Models of collaborative care have shown their efficacy in primary care by improving patient-related outcomes. The main goal of this trial is to compare the effectiveness of a collaborative care model with usual care for people with cognitive impairment who have been admitted to a hospital for treatment due to a somatic illness. The aim of the intervention is to improve the continuity of treatment and care across the transition between the in-hospital and adjoining primary care sectors.

METHODS/DESIGN

The trial is a longitudinal multisite randomized controlled trial with two arms (care as usual and intersectoral care management). Inclusion criteria at the time of hospital admission due to a somatic illness are age 70+ years, cognitive impairment (Mini Mental State Examination, MMSE ≤26), living at home, and written informed consent. Each participant will have a baseline assessment at the hospital and two follow-up assessments at home (3 and 12 months after discharge). The estimated sample size is n = 398 people with cognitive inmpairement plus their respective informal caregivers (where available). In the intersectoral care management group, specialized care managers will develop, implement, and monitor individualized treatment and care based on comprehensive assessments of the unmet needs of the patients and their informal caregivers. These assessments will occur at the hospital and in participants' homes. Primary outcomes are (1) activities of daily living, (2) readmission to the hospital, and (3) institutionalization. Secondary outcomes include (a) frailty, (b) delirium, (c) quality of life, (d) cognitive status, (e) behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia, (f) utilization of services, and (g) informal caregiver burden.

DISCUSSION

In the event of proving efficacy, this trial will deliver a proof of concept for implementation into routine care. The cost-effectiveness analyses as well as an independent process evaluation will increase the likelihood of meeting this goal. The trial will enable an in-depth analysis of mediating and moderating effects for different health outcomes at the interface between hospital care and primary care. By highlighting treatment and care, the study will provide insights into unmet needs at the time of hospital admission, and the opportunities and barriers to meeting those needs during the hospital stay and after discharge.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03359408 ; December 2, 2017.

Cost-effectiveness of a collaborative dementia care management-Results of a cluster-randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of collaborative dementia care management (DCM).

METHODS

The cost-effectiveness analysis was based on the data of 444 patients of a cluster-randomized, controlled trial, conceptualized to evaluate a collaborative DCM that aimed to optimize treatment and care in dementia. Health-care resource use, costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost per QALY gained were measured over a 24-month time horizon.

RESULTS

DCM increased QALYs (+0.05) and decreased costs (-569€) due to a lower hospitalization and a delayed institutionalization (7 months) compared with usual care. The probability of DCM being cost-effective was 88% at willingness-to-pay thresholds of 40,000€ per QALY gained and higher in patients living alone compared to those not living alone (96% vs. 26%).

DISCUSSION

DCM is likely to be a cost-effective strategy in treating dementia and thus beneficial for public health-care payers and patients, especially for those living alone.

Prevalence and Determinants of Agonistic Autoantibodies Against α1-Adrenergic Receptors in Patients Screened Positive for Dementia: Results from the Population-Based DelpHi-Study

BACKGROUND

There is a need to assess promising biomarkers for diagnosis and treatment response in real-life settings. Despite the important role of vascular risk factors, cardiovascular biomarkers have played a minor role in dementia research. Agonistic autoantibodies (agAAB) directed against G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) are discussed as modulators of pathology and clinical manifestation.

OBJECTIVE

1) Describe prevalence of agAAB directed against GPCR, especially agABB against α1-adrenergic receptors (α1-AR-agAAB) and agABB directed against β2-adrenergic receptors (β2-AR-agAAB) and 2) identify factors associated with agAAB in people with dementia during routine care.

METHODS

Blood samples and data from 95 subjects who screened positive for dementia from a primary care cohort, analyzed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for detecting agAAB. Sociodemographic and clinical data were assessed, and medical records checked.

RESULTS

In 40 (42%) samples, agAAB was detected, with n = 29 (31%) representing α1-AR-agAAB and n = 21 (22%) β2-AR-agAAB. There was no association between the presence of any antibody and a formal diagnosis of dementia. However, patients with coronary heart disease were more likely (OR = 4.23) to have α1-AR-agAAB than those without coronary heart disease. There were no associations between agAAB and age, sex, education, or cognitive impairment.

DISCUSSION

For the first time, we show that autoantibodies have a significant prevalence in people with dementia in a routine care setting. Previous findings were restricted to highly selective samples. We replicated the association between α1-AR-agAAB in patients with coronary heart diseases but were not able to find other factors associated with the presence of agAAB.

Impact of health service interventions on acute hospital use in community-dwelling persons with dementia: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Background

Persons with dementia have twice the acute hospital use as older persons without dementia. In addition to straining overburdened healthcare systems, acute hospital use impacts patient and caregiver quality of life and is associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes including death. Reducing avoidable acute hospital use in persons with dementia is thus a global healthcare priority. However, evidence regarding the impact of health service interventions as defined by the Effective Practice and Organization of Care Cochrane Group on acute hospital use is scant and inconclusive. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize available evidence on the impact of health service interventions on acute hospital use in community-dwelling persons with dementia compared to usual care.

Methods

Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane CENTRAL (from 01/1995 to 08/2017). Study eligibility criteria: Randomised controlled trials measuring the impact of health service interventions on acute hospital use (proportion and mean number of emergency department visits and hospitalisations, mean number of hospital days, measured at 12 months, and at longest follow-up) in community-dwelling persons with dementia, compared to usual care. Study selection, appraisal and synthesis methods: Reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias, with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Authors of relevant trials were queried about unpublished data. Random effects model was used for meta-analyses. Effect heterogeneity was assessed through prediction intervals, and explored using sub-group analyses.

Findings

Seventeen trials provided data on 4,549 persons. Unpublished data were obtained for 13 trials, representing 65% of synthesized data. Most interventions included a case management or a self-management component. None of the outcome comparisons provided conclusive evidence supporting the hypothesis that these interventions would lead to a decrease in acute hospital use. Furthermore, prediction intervals indicated possible and important increased service use associated with these interventions, such as emergency department visits, hospital admissions, and hospital days. Subgroup analyses did not favour any type of intervention. A limitation of this study is the inclusion of any type of health service intervention, which may have increased the observed heterogeneity.

Conclusion

Despite a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis, including predominantly unpublished data, no health service intervention beyond usual care was found to reduce acute hospital use in community-dwelling persons with dementia. An important increase in service use may be associated with these interventions. Further research is urgently needed to identify effective interventions for this vulnerable population to limit rising acute hospital use, associated costs and adverse outcomes. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42016046444.

Comorbidity in Dementia Diseases and Associated Health Care Resources Utilization and Cost

BACKGROUND

People with dementia (PwD) suffer from coexisting medical conditions, creating complex clinical challenges and increasing the risk of poor outcomes, which could be associated with high healthcare cost.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the prevalence of comorbidity in PwD and to analyze the association between comorbidity in dementia diseases and healthcare costs from a payer's perspective.

METHODS

This cross-sectional analysis was based on n = 362 PwD of the DelpHi-MV trial (Dementia: Life-and person-centered help in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania). Comorbidity was assessed using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and was categorized into low, high, and very high comorbidity. Healthcare resource utilization and unit costs were used to calculate costs. Multivariable regression models were applied to analyze the association between comorbidity and costs.

RESULTS

Comorbidity was highly prevalent in the sample. 47% of PwD had a very high, 37% a high, and 16% a low comorbidity in addition to dementia. The most prevalent co-existing comorbidity were diabetes mellitus (42%), peripheral vascular disease (28%) and cerebrovascular disease (25%). Total costs significantly increased by 528€ (SE = 214, CI95 = 109-947, p = 0.014) with each further comorbidity, especially due to higher cost for medication and medical aids. Compared with a low comorbidity, a very high comorbidity was significantly associated with 818€ (SE = 168, CI95 = 489-1147, p < 0.001) higher medication costs and 336€ (SE = 161, CI95 = 20-652, p = 0.037) higher cost for medical aids. There were no significant association between a higher comorbidity and cost for formal care services.

CONCLUSIONS

Comorbidity in PwD represents a substantial financial burden on healthcare payers and is a challenge for patients, healthcare providers, and the health systems. Innovative approaches are needed to achieve a patient-oriented management of treatment and care in comorbid PwD to reduce long-term costs.

[The practice staff in primary care dementia recognition-is there an untapped potential?]

BACKGROUND

It is regularly criticized that the diagnostics of dementia are not used effectively and consistently enough in general practitioner (GP) care. An important component for the optimization of early detection is the targeted training and involvement of the practice staff. To date, there is a lack of studies that capture the extent to which primary care personnel are actually integrated into dementia recognition and how they assess their own potential to contribute to a more efficient diagnosis of dementia.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was based on 45 qualitative individual interviews with GP practice personnel in Rhineland-Palatinate and Hesse, which were conducted orally and personally between November 2017 and June 2018 (duration: 25-70 min).

RESULTS

The results show that GP personnel showed a great willingness to support the family doctor in dementia recognition and diagnostics; however, this potential is only partly used in primary care practices. Most of the sample showed marked uncertainties in assessing possible signs of incipient dementia. This corresponds to the fact that only a minority of the interviewees had ever completed training in which dementia was an important topic. The identification of dementia patients by the practice employees seems to function according to the random principle and less according to systematic criteria.

CONCLUSION

The analysis showed that many GPs are not yet aware of the opportunities offered by a greater involvement of practice personnel in the recognition of dementia. Accordingly, GPs should be advised of the benefits of such a solution. At the same time, more attention should be paid to low-threshold training formats, which are tailored specifically to the perspective of practice employees and convey important dementia-specific diagnostics, action and communication skills.

Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older people

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate polypharmacy is a particular concern in older people and is associated with negative health outcomes. Choosing the best interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is a priority, hence interest in appropriate polypharmacy, where many medicines may be used to achieve better clinical outcomes for patients, is growing. This is the second update of this Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine which interventions, alone or in combination, are effective in improving the appropriate use of polypharmacy and reducing medication-related problems in older people.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and two trials registers up until 7 February 2018, together with handsearching of reference lists to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series. Eligible studies described interventions affecting prescribing aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in people aged 65 years and older, prescribed polypharmacy (four or more medicines), which used a validated tool to assess prescribing appropriateness. These tools can be classified as either implicit tools (judgement-based/based on expert professional judgement) or explicit tools (criterion-based, comprising lists of drugs to be avoided in older people).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts of eligible studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. We pooled study-specific estimates, and used a random-effects model to yield summary estimates of effect and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 32 studies, 20 from this update. Included studies consisted of 18 randomised trials, 10 cluster randomised trials (one of which was a stepped-wedge design), two non-randomised trials and two controlled before-after studies. One intervention consisted of computerised decision support (CDS); and 31 were complex, multi-faceted pharmaceutical-care based approaches (i.e. the responsible provision of medicines to improve patient's outcomes), one of which incorporated a CDS component as part of their multi-faceted intervention. Interventions were provided in a variety of settings. Interventions were delivered by healthcare professionals such as general physicians, pharmacists and geriatricians, and all were conducted in high-income countries. Assessments using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, found that there was a high and/or unclear risk of bias across a number of domains. Based on the GRADE approach, the overall certainty of evidence for each pooled outcome ranged from low to very low.It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care improves medication appropriateness (as measured by an implicit tool), mean difference (MD) -4.76, 95% CI -9.20 to -0.33; 5 studies, N = 517; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the number of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.22, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.05; 7 studies; N = 1832; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PIMs, (risk ratio (RR) 0.79, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.02; 11 studies; N = 3079; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may slightly reduce the number of potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) (SMD -0.81, 95% CI -0.98 to -0.64; 2 studies; N = 569; low-certainty evidence), however it must be noted that this effect estimate is based on only two studies, which had serious limitations in terms of risk bias. Likewise, it is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PPOs (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.85; 5 studies; N = 1310; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference in hospital admissions (data not pooled; 12 studies; N = 4052; low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference in quality of life (data not pooled; 12 studies; N = 3211; low-certainty evidence). Medication-related problems were reported in eight studies (N = 10,087) using different terms (e.g. adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions). No consistent intervention effect on medication-related problems was noted across studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is unclear whether interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy, such as reviews of patients' prescriptions, resulted in clinically significant improvement; however, they may be slightly beneficial in terms of reducing potential prescribing omissions (PPOs); but this effect estimate is based on only two studies, which had serious limitations in terms of risk bias.

Supporting family dementia caregivers: testing the efficacy of dementia care management on multifaceted caregivers' burden

OBJECTIVES

Current research suggests that dementia care management (DCM) can decrease burden and associated health impairments of caregivers. The objective of this secondary analysis is to investigate the impact of DCM on multifaceted caregivers' burden dimensions by differentiating between objective and subjective burden.

METHODS

A sample of n = 317 dyads of caregivers and community-dwelling people with dementia (PwD) participated in a general practitioner-based, cluster-randomized intervention trial (Identifier:NCT01401582) with two arms and comprehensive data assessment at baseline and 12-month follow-up. Data provided by the caregiver included an inventory with 88 items in 20 different dimensions.

RESULTS

Caregivers in the intervention 'DCM' group showed decreased caregiver burden, especially in caregivers' objective burden due to caring (i.e. emotional support), caregivers' subjective burden due to behavior change (i.e. cognition, aggression and resistance, depression, late symptoms) and caregivers' subjective burden due to perceived conflicts between needs and responsibilities to care (i.e. financial losses) compared to caregivers in the control 'care as usual' group, which showed significant increased caregiver burden after 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support evidence for the effectiveness of DCM to lower family dementia caregivers' burden in multifaceted dimensions.