Characteristics of dementia-friendly hospitals: an integrative review

"I'm still in the lap of the gods… I don't know whether I'm going to improve or not": listening to people with dementia or cognitive impairment and their support people, talking about inpatient rehabilitation experiences

PURPOSE

People with dementia often experience poor outcomes in hospital and prolonged lengths of stay. They are sometimes labelled as having "poor rehabilitation potential". This study aimed to understand the inpatient rehabilitation experiences of people with dementia or cognitive impairment, and their support people, to inform future work to improve rehabilitation access and outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An exploratory qualitative study from an interpretivist perspective. Participants were inpatients of a geriatric rehabilitation unit in Australia, and their chosen support people. Semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. An analytical framework was developed and indexed to the dataset, followed by charting and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Ten people with dementia or cognitive impairment and nine support people participated (n = 19). Four themes were identified representing an interpretation of the analysis intended to inform clinical practice: Support patients to engage in the rehabilitation process; create a hospitable environment; recognise and work with care partners; and ensure staff have adequate dementia knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Practical, emotional, process-related, and dementia-specific factors may influence the experiences of people living with dementia or cognitive impairment when participating in inpatient rehabilitation. Future research could investigate whether improvements focused on these factors might enhance quality of care for people with dementia.

Contextualizing the results of an integrative review on the characteristics of dementia-friendly hospitals: a workshop with professional dementia experts

BACKGROUND

To become a dementia-friendly hospital (DFH) is increasingly being discussed in health care practice, research, politics and society. In our previous integrative review, we identified six characteristics of DFHs. To thoroughly discuss and contextualize these characteristics in relation to hospitals in Germany, we involved professional dementia experts in our review process.

METHODS

At the end of our review process, we involved professional dementia experts at the 'contributing' level of the ACTIVE framework to discuss and reflect on the six DFH characteristics we identified. We conducted a group process in the form of a one-day workshop. The workshop consisted of four steps: 1. presentation of review results (input), 2. modification of DFH characteristics and rating of their relevance in smaller working groups, 3. discussion of group results in plenary and 4. questionnaire for prioritization and rating of feasibility. The data were analyzed in MAXQDA using content analysis and descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 16 professional dementia experts working in hospitals participated in the workshop. All the previously identified characteristics of a DFH were rated as relevant or very relevant for patients with dementia, their relatives and health care professionals from the professional dementia experts' perspective. They made a few modifications of the six characteristics at the level of subcategories, aspects, and descriptions. The feasibility of the characteristics in hospitals was critically discussed regarding resources, hospital structures and processes, the role of nurses, and the current care situation of people with dementia in hospitals. More than half of the subcategories of the characteristics were considered very difficult or difficult to implement by most professional dementia experts.

CONCLUSION

The involvement of professional dementia experts helped us contextualize our review findings within the German hospital setting. These results highlight the need to consider resources, funding options, influencing factors, and the current situation and culture of care provided by hospitals before implementing DFH characteristics. Beside the involvement of professional dementia experts and various health care professionals, the involvement of other stakeholders, such as people with dementia and their relatives, is necessary in future research for the development of a DFH.

Validation and expansion of a behavioral framework for dementia care partner resilience (CP-R)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Resilience - the ability to bounce back after a stressor - is a core component of successful family caregiving for people living with dementia. In this manuscript, we describe the preliminary empirical validation of a new behavioral framework developed from existing literature for assessing care partner resilience, CP-R, and propose its potential value for future research and clinical care.

METHODS

We selected 27 dementia care partners who reported significant challenges prompted by a recent health crisis of their care recipient from three local university-affiliated hospitals in the United States. We conducted semi-structured interviews to elicit care partners' accounts of what they did to address those challenges that helped them recover during and after the crisis. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using abductive thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

When persons with dementia experienced health crises, care partners described various challenges in managing new and often complex health and care needs, navigating informal and formal care systems, balancing care responsibilities with other needs, and managing difficult emotions. We identified five resilience-related behavioral domains, including problem-response (problem-solving, -distancing, -accepting, and -observing), help-related (help-seeking, -receiving, and -disengaging), self-growth (self-care activities, spiritual-related activities, and developing and maintaining meaningful relationships), compassion-related (self-sacrifice and relational compassion behaviors), and learning-related (learning from others and reflecting).

DISCUSSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Findings support and expand the multidimensional CP-R behavior framework for understanding dementia care partner resilience. CP-R could guide the systematic measurement of dementia care partners' resilience-related behaviors, support individual tailoring of behavioral care plans, and inform the development of resilience-enhancing interventions.

Mapping implementation strategies of evidence-based interventions for three preselected phenomena in people with dementia-a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Caring for people with dementia is complex, and there are various evidence-based interventions. However, a gap exists between the available interventions and how to implement them. The objectives of our review are to identify implementation strategies, implementation outcomes, and influencing factors for the implementation of evidence-based interventions that focus on three preselected phenomena in people with dementia: (A) behavior that challenges supporting a person with dementia in long-term care, (B) delirium in acute care, and (C) postacute care needs.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review according to the description of the Joanna Briggs Institute. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. For the data analysis, we conducted deductive content analysis. For this analysis, we used the Expert Recommendations for Implementation Change (ERIC), implementation outcomes according to Proctor and colleagues, and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

RESULTS

We identified 362 (A), 544 (B), and 714 records (C) on the three phenomena and included 7 (A), 3 (B), and 3 (C) studies. Among the studies, nine reported on the implementation strategies they used. Clusters with the most reported strategies were adapt and tailor to context and train and educate stakeholders. We identified one study that tested the effectiveness of the applied implementation strategy, while ten studies reported implementation outcomes (mostly fidelity). Regarding factors that influence implementation, all identified studies reported between 1 and 19 factors. The most reported factors were available resources and the adaptability of the intervention. To address dementia-specific influencing factors, we enhanced the CFIR construct of patient needs and resources to include family needs and resources.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a high degree of homogeneity across the different dementia phenomena, the evidence-based interventions, and the care settings in terms of the implementation strategies used, implementation outcomes measured, and influencing factors identified. However, it remains unclear to what extent implementation strategies themselves are evidence-based and which intervention strategy can be used by practitioners when either the implementation outcomes are not adjusted to the implementation strategy and/or the effects of implementation strategies are mostly unknown. Future research needs to focus on investigating the effectiveness of implementation strategies for evidence-based interventions for dementia care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The review protocol was prospectively published (Manietta et al., BMJ Open 11:e051611, 2021).

Counseling regarding the care of people with dementia with a focus on §7a SGB XI in Germany: a "gray-shaded" scoping review

BACKGROUND

Care counseling is an important psychosocial intervention for people with care needs and their relatives and can contribute to maintaining and/or improving a patient's quality of life and reducing the burden of caregivers. This is especially the case for people with dementia and their relatives, in which the methods of care counseling need to be different than those for individuals with non-dementia related care needs. Furthermore, the counseling content needs to be adjusted to the specific form and stage of dementia. In Germany, every person who receives support per the German Social Law Book XI (SBG XI) can take advantage of care counseling according to §7a SGB XI. To date, there is no systematic overview of counseling services for people with dementia and their relatives related to this specific provision in Germany.

METHODS

We conducted a gray-shaded scoping review with a focus on the evaluation of care counseling according to §7a SGB XI for people with dementia and their relatives. For this purpose, we applied five search strategies. We researched (1) national electronic databases, (2) Google, (3) targeted websites, (4) experts, and (5) academic electronic databases. Additionally, for the included gray literature, we conducted backward citation tracking via reference lists and forward citation tracking via Google Scholar for scientific articles. Screening of the identified potentially relevant records was performed independently by two reviewers.

RESULTS

We identified 985 records and included 6 studies in our review. We divided the identified studies into three themes: understanding conceptual dimensions, digitalization of counseling, and understanding the perspective of those being counseled. No studies investigated the perspective and experience of people with dementia and their relatives regarding the counseling service according to §7a SGB XI.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that further research is needed, especially regarding the experience of people with dementia and their relatives who participated in counseling according to §7a SGB XI. It seems essential to understand the perspective of people with dementia and their relatives to improve and tailor counseling services in Germany.

REGISTRATION

The review protocol was prospectively published (BMJ Open 12:e059771, 2022).