A Feasibility Study of Designing a Family-Caregiver-Centred Dementia Care Handbook

Author(s):  
Ting-Ya Chang ◽  
Kevin C. Tseng
2013 ◽  
Vol 70 (6) ◽  
pp. 1369-1380 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Wang ◽  
Lily Dongxia Xiao ◽  
Guo-Ping He ◽  
Anita De Bellis

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp19X703253
Author(s):  
Ian Maidment

Background‘Behaviour that Challenges’ is common in older people with dementia in care homes and treated with antipsychotics. Policy is focused on reducing the use of antipsychotics in people with dementia and therefore reducing harm. This submission reports results on a NIHR-funded feasibility study MEDREV.AimTo assess the feasibility of medication review by a specialist dementia care pharmacist combined with staff training with the objective of limiting the inappropriate use of psychotropics.MethodCare homes were recruited. People meeting the inclusion (dementia; medication for behaviour that challenges), or their personal consultee, were approached. A specialist dementia care pharmacist reviewed medication and made recommendations. Care staff received a 3-hour training session promoting person-centred care and GPs’ brief training. Data were collected on recruitment and retention, and implementation of recommendations. Other outcomes included the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home version, quality of life (EQ-5D/DEMQoL), cognition (sMMSE), and health economic (CSRI). Qualitative interviews explored expectations and experiences.ResultsMedication reviews were conducted in 29 of 34 residents recruited and the pharmacist recommended reviewing medication in 21 of these. Fifteen (71.4%) of these were antidepressants: 57.1% (12 of 21) of recommendations were implemented and implementation took a mean of 98.4 days. Non-implementation themes for will be presented. One hundred and sixty-four care staff received training (care homes = 142; primary care = 22). Twenty-one participants (care home managers = 5; GPs = 3; nurses = 2; care staff = 11) were interviewed.ConclusionThe study was feasible, although the approach would need modification to improve the uptake of reviews and reduce the delay in implementation. Most of the recommendations related to antidepressants.


2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 1071-1082 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feija D. Schaap ◽  
Andrea S. Fokkens ◽  
Geke J. Dijkstra ◽  
Sijmen A. Reijneveld ◽  
Evelyn J. Finnema

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 710-710
Author(s):  
Mary Wyman ◽  
Nickolas Lambrou ◽  
Debra Miller ◽  
Sunshine Wheelock ◽  
Florence Petri ◽  
...  

Abstract Prevalence of dementia among American Indian/Alaska Natives (AI/AN) is higher than in white populations, and AI/AN communities experience dementia care service gaps. This study explored perspectives within AI/AN communities regarding dementia, the family caregiver role, and home and community-based service use. Using tenets of Community-Based Participatory Research, qualitative interviews and a brief survey were conducted with 22 members of the Oneida Nation of Wisconsin (mean age 71 years, 73% female). Of the sample, 63.6% identified as a past or current family caregiver for a loved one with dementia. Awareness of services varied; 82% were aware of memory cafes, 75% knew of the caregiver support group, and 43% were familiar with dementia care specialist services. Thematic analysis revealed shared values of involving the family and community in dementia care, and offer guidance to support greater engagement in services. Implications for culturally-tailored service provision within AI/AN communities are discussed.


2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lily Dongxia Xiao ◽  
Jing Wang ◽  
Guo-Ping He ◽  
Anita De Bellis ◽  
Jenny Verbeeck ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (23) ◽  
pp. 1-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Gridley ◽  
Jenni Brooks ◽  
Yvonne Birks ◽  
Kate Baxter ◽  
Gillian Parker

BackgroundImproving dementia care quality is an urgent priority nationally and internationally. Life story work (LSW) is an intervention that aims to improve individual outcomes and care for people with dementia and their carers. LSW gathers information and artefacts about the person, their history and interests, and produces a tangible output: the ‘life story’.ObjectiveTo establish whether or not full evaluation of LSW was feasible.DesignMixed-methods feasibility study.MethodsIn-depth interviews and focus groups explored experiences of LSW and best practice with people with dementia, family members and dementia care staff. A systematic review explored best practice and theories of change for LSW. These stages helped to identify the outcomes and resources to explore in the feasibility study. A representative sample survey of health and social care dementia care providers in England established LSW practice in different settings. A survey of a self-selected sample of family members of people with dementia explored how LSW is experienced. Two small outcome studies (stepped-wedge study in six care homes and pre-test post-test study in inpatient specialist dementia care wards) explored the feasibility of full evaluation of LSW in these settings.SettingsSurvey: generalist and specialist care homes; NHS dementia care settings; and community dementia services. Feasibility study: care homes and NHS inpatient dementia care wards.ParticipantsNHS and social care services, people with dementia, family carers, care home staff and NHS staff.InterventionsLSW.Main outcome measuresSpread of LSW and good practice, quality of life (QoL) for the person with dementia and carers, relationships between people with dementia and family carers, staff attitudes about dementia, staff burnout, resource use and costs.Review methodsNarrative review and synthesis, following Centre for Review and Dissemination guidelines.ResultsGood practice in LSW is identifiable, as are theories of change about how it might affect given outcomes. Indicators of best practice were produced. LSW is spreading but practice and use vary between care settings and are not always in line with identified good practice. Two different models of LSW are evident; these are likely to be appropriate at different stages of the dementia journey. The feasibility study showed some positive changes in staff attitudes towards dementia and, for some people with dementia, improvements in QoL. These may be attributable to LSW but these potential benefits require full evaluation. The feasibility work established the likely costs of LSW and highlighted the challenges of future evaluation in care homes and inpatient dementia care settings.LimitationsThere was insufficient evidence in the literature to allow estimation of outcome size. We did not carry out planned Markov chain modelling to inform decisions about carrying out future evaluation because of the dearth of outcome data in the literature; low levels of data return for people with dementia in the hospital settings; lack of detected effect for most people with dementia; and questions about implementation in the research settings.ConclusionsLSW is used across different health and social care settings in England, but in different ways, not all of which reflect ‘good practice’. This large, complex study identified a wide range of challenges for future research, but also the possibility that LSW may help to improve care staff attitudes towards dementia and QoL for some people with dementia.Future workFull evaluation of LSW as an intervention to improve staff attitudes and care is feasible with researchers based in or very close to care settings to ensure high-quality data collection.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 941-941
Author(s):  
Emma Quach ◽  
Emily Franzosa ◽  
Rachael Scali ◽  
Lauren Moo ◽  
Christine Hartmann

Abstract Family caregiver support is a cornerstone of dementia care. Yet the transition to virtual care during COVID raised questions about the ability of dementia care teams to maintain caregiver support services. We surveyed Veterans Affairs clinicians about dementia caregiver support delivery following the COVID surge in the six New England states. 38 out of 68 (55%) clinicians from 6 states responded in June and July 2020. We found: 1) Clinicians continued providing the same types of support services for family caregivers before and after COVID, with over 50% of providers interacting with caregivers daily or multiple times per week. The most prevalent services were caregiver needs assessments, information and referrals, and assistance with accessing services. Two-thirds reported continuing to offer caregiver skills training and counseling, including peer support groups. 2) Caregiver support modality changed, most frequently through the combined use of phone and video, followed by only phone, and rarely, by only video. 3) Providers indicated that phone, more than video, increased to replace in-person interactions, because of multiple factors: caregivers (who continued to call for support on an as-needed basis but declined video encounters), providers (who began to provide group support via phone), and service factors (ad hoc versus scheduled encounters). Results suggest clinicians continued providing caregiver support despite suspension of in-person interactions, but future research is needed to assess the impacts of caregiver support delivery mostly by phone and factors underlying the limited use of video in delivering caregiver support.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document