Validating care and treatment scenarios for measuring decisional conflict regarding future care preferences among older adults.

OBJECTIVE: Decisional conflict is used increasingly as an outcome measure in advance care planning (ACP) studies. When the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) is used in anticipatory decision-making contexts, the scale is typically tethered to hypothetical scenarios. This study reports preliminary validation data for hypothetical scenarios relating to life-sustaining treatments and care utilisation to inform their broader use in ACP studies. METHODS: Three hypothetical scenarios were developed by a panel of multidisciplinary researchers, clinicians and community representatives. A convenience sample of 262 older adults were surveyed. Analyses investigated comprehensibility, missing data properties, sample norms, structural, convergent and discriminant validity. RESULTS: Response characteristics suggested that two of the scenarios had adequate comprehensibility and response spread. Missing response rates were unrelated to demographic characteristics. Predicted associations between DCS scores and anxiety (r's = .31-.37, p < .001), and ACP engagement (r's = -.41 to -.37, p < .001) indicated convergent validity. CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of older adults reported clinically significant levels of decisional conflict when responding to a range of hypothetical scenarios about care or treatment. Two scenarios showed acceptable comprehensibility and response characteristics. A third scenario may be suitable following further refinement. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The scenarios tested here were designed in collaboration with a community representative and were further piloted with two groups of community members with relevant lived experiences; four people with life-limiting conditions and five current or former care partners.

Knowledge, attitudes and self-confidence with skills required for providing dementia care in physicians at primary healthcare settings in Vietnam.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is a global public health priority. The World Health Organization adopted a Global Action Plan on Dementia, with dementia awareness a priority. This study examined the knowledge, attitudes, and self-confidence with skills required for providing dementia care among primary health care providers in Vietnam. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 405 primary health care providers who worked at commune health stations and district health centers in eight provinces across Vietnam. RESULTS: The results showed that primary health care providers had poor knowledge and little confidence but more positive attitudes toward dementia care and management. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest the training needs for building capacity amongst primary health care providers, which will be critical as Vietnam's population ages.

Factors Associated with Advance Care Planning Engagement Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.

AIM: To explore the associations between depression, anxiety, decisional conflict and advance care planning engagement and the potential mediating role of decisional conflict in the associations between depression, anxiety and advance care planning among community-dwelling older adults. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 262 community-dwelling older Australians across metropolitan, regional and rural communities between August and October 2022. METHODS: Validated self-reported questions were used to collect data on anxiety, depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale), advance care planning engagement (Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey) and covariates (demographic characteristics, health literacy [Health Literacy Screening Questions]), overall health status (Short form 36). Data analysis included descriptive statistics, bivariate association analysis, general linear modelling and path analysis. RESULTS: Anxiety and decisional conflict were directly associated with advance care planning engagement even after controlling for potential effects of demographic characteristics, health literacy and overall health status. The model, including age, gender, country of birth, language spoken at home, education, overall health status, anxiety, depression, decisional conflict and interaction between anxiety and decisional conflict, explained 24.3% of the variance in their advance care planning engagement. Decisional conflict mediated the association between anxiety and advance care planning engagement. CONCLUSION: Increased anxiety and decisional conflict were associated with reduced advance care planning engagement directly, even among community-dwelling older adults with higher levels of education and health literacy. Increased anxiety was associated with reduced advance care planning engagement indirectly via increased decisional conflict. Healthcare professionals should assess community-dwelling older adults' anxiety and implement interventions to manage their anxiety and decisional conflict, as these may facilitate their engagement in advance care planning. IMPACT: Understanding factors associated with advance care planning engagement among community-dwelling older adults may inform strategies facilitating their future engagement in advance care planning. Findings from this study may be used as evidence for future implementation to facilitate the engagement of community-dwelling older adults in advance care planning. REPORTING METHOD: The STROBE statement checklist was used as a guide to writing the manuscript. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The study was advertised publicly through social media (e.g. Twitter and Facebook) and newsletters (e.g. Advance Care Planning Australia, Centre for Volunteering, Palliative Care Australia and a large home care service provider with approximately 7000 older clients receiving support or services) to recruit participants. People aged 65 years and older living independently in the Australian community who could communicate in English were invited to participate and answer the questionnaire.

Experiences and perceptions of dementia in Vietnam and among the Vietnamese diaspora: a systematic review of qualitative studies.

Objectives: This paper aimed to review and synthesise the qualitative research evidence on the experiences and perceptions of dementia in Vietnam and among the Vietnamese diaspora.Methods: Systematic searches were conducted in June 2019 using Medline, Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO and Cochrane electronic databases, as well as grey literature. Keywords and Medical Subject Headings [MeSH terms] for dementia and associated terms were combined with keywords for Vietnam and its provinces. Qualitative research articles published in English or Vietnamese were included to examine evidence on the life experiences of Vietnamese people with dementia using thematic analysis.Results: Our searches resulted in 3,940 papers, from which 21 qualitative research studies were included for final analysis. The majority of research has not been undertaken in Vietnam but with the Vietnamese diaspora in Western countries and has taken a cultural perspective to analyses. Research in Western countries has focused on the need for culturally adapted and culturally sensitive models of care. Emerging themes about the life experiences of Vietnamese people with dementia identified from the studies included: many people do not have diagnostic terms for dementia but use the descriptive language of symptoms; stigma was a reported problem and on occasions can be observed in the descriptive language used for people with dementia; cultural and traditional values create both an opportunity and a barrier, supporting compassion, family care and relaxation, but creating barriers to accessing health services or long-term residential care.Conclusions: This is the first systematic review reporting qualitative evidence on the life experiences of people with dementia in Vietnam and among the Vietnamese diaspora. Future research is needed on the voice of people with dementia themselves and their caregivers particularly in Vietnam, and low and middle-income countries with regards to living with dementia, pathways to care from diagnosis, treatment, care and support, additional social care and preparedness for end of life care for people with dementia.

Frailty in older people: Rehabilitation Treatment Research Examining Separate Settings (FORTRESS): protocol for a hybrid type II stepped wedge, cluster, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Frailty in older people is associated with increased risk of falls, longer length of stay in hospital, increased risk of institutionalisation and death. Frailty can be measured using validated tools. Multi-component frailty interventions are recommended in clinical practice guidelines but are not routinely implemented in clinical practice. METHODS: The Frailty in Older people: Rehabilitation, Treatment, Research Examining Separate Settings (FORTRESS) trial is a multisite, hybrid type II, stepped wedge, cluster, randomised trial with blinded assessment and intention-to-treat analysis being conducted in Australia. The study aims to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an embedded individualised multicomponent frailty intervention (commencing in hospital and continuing in the community) on readmissions, frailty and quality of life when compared with usual care. Frail older people admitted to study wards with no significant cognitive impairment, who are expected to return home after discharge, will be eligible to participate. Participants will receive extra sessions of physiotherapy, pharmacy, and dietetics during their admission. A Community Implementation Facilitator will coordinate implementation of the frailty management strategies and primary network liaison. The primary outcome is number of days of non-elective hospital readmissions during 12 month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes include frailty status measured using the FRAIL scale; quality of life measured using the EQ-5D-5L; and time-to-event for readmission and readmission rates. The total cost of delivering the intervention will be assessed, and cost-effectiveness analyses will be conducted. Economic evaluation will include analyses for health outcomes measured in terms of the main clinical outcomes. Implementation outcomes will be collected as part of a process evaluation. Recruitment commenced in 2020 and we are aiming to recruit 732 participants over the three-year duration of the study. DISCUSSION: This study will reveal whether intervening with frail older people to address factors contributing to frailty can reduce hospital readmissions and improve frailty status and quality of life. If the FORTRESS intervention provides a clinically significant and cost-effective result, it will demonstrate an improved approach to treating frail patients, both in hospital and when they return home. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12620000760976p . ANZCTR registered 24 July 2020.

Characterising Australian memory clinics: current practice and service needs informing national service guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Memory clinics (MCs) play a key role in accurate and timely diagnoses and treatment of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. However, within Australia, there are little data available on current practices in MCs, which hinder international comparisons for best practice, harmonisation efforts and national coordination. Here, we aimed to characterise current service profiles of Australian MCs. METHODS: The 'Australian Dementia Network Survey of Expert Opinion on Best Practice and the Current Clinical Landscape' was conducted between August-September 2020 as part of a larger-scale Delphi process deployed to develop national MC guidelines. In this study, we report on the subset of questions pertaining to current practice including wait-times and post-diagnostic care. RESULTS: Responses were received from 100 health professionals representing 60 separate clinics (45 public, 11 private, and 4 university/research clinics). The majority of participants were from clinics in metropolitan areas (79%) and in general were from high socioeconomic areas. While wait-times varied, only 28.3% of clinics were able to offer an appointment within 1-2 weeks for urgent referrals, with significantly more private clinics (58.3%) compared to public clinics (19.5%) being able to do so. Wait-times were less than 8 weeks for 34.5% of non-urgent referrals. Only 20.0 and 30.9% of clinics provided cognitive interventions or post-diagnostic support respectively, with 7.3% offering home-based reablement programs, and only 12.7% offering access to group-based education. Metropolitan clinics utilised neuropsychological assessments for a broader range of cases and were more likely to offer clinical trials and access to research opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to similar countries with comprehensive government-funded public healthcare systems (i.e., United Kingdom, Ireland and Canada), wait-times for Australian MCs are long, and post-diagnostic support or evidence-based strategies targeting cognition are not common practice. The timely and important results of this study highlight a need for Australian MCs to adopt a more holistic service of multidisciplinary assessment and post-diagnostic support, as well as the need for the number of Australian MCs to be increased to match the rising number of dementia cases.

Increasing the uptake of vitamin D supplement use in Australian residential aged care facilities: results from the vitamin D implementation (ViDAus) study.

BACKGROUND: Adequate (≥800 IU/day) vitamin D supplement use in Australian residential aged care facilities (RACFs) is variable and non-optimal. The vitamin D implementation (ViDAus) study aimed to employ a range of strategies to support the uptake of this best practice in participating facilities. The aim of this paper is to report on facility level prevalence outcomes and factors associated with vitamin D supplement use. METHODS: This trial followed a stepped wedge cluster, non-randomised design with 41 individual facilities serving as clusters pragmatically allocated into two wedges that commenced the intervention six months apart. This multifaceted, interdisciplinary knowledge translation intervention was led by a project officer, who worked with nominated champions at participating facilities to provide education and undertake quality improvement (QI) planning. Local barriers and responsive strategies were identified to engage stakeholders and promote widespread uptake of vitamin D supplement use. RESULTS: This study found no significant difference in the change of vitamin D supplement use between the intervention (17 facilities with approx. 1500 residents) and control group (24 facilities with approx. 1900 residents) at six months (difference in prevalence change between groups was 1.10, 95% CI - 3.8 to 6.0, p = 0.6). The average overall facility change in adequate (≥800 IU/day) vitamin D supplement use over 12 months was 3.86% (95% CI 0.6 to 7.2, p = 0.02), which achieved a facility level average prevalence of 59.6%. The variation in uptake at 12 months ranged from 25 to 88% of residents at each facility. In terms of the types of strategies employed for implementation, there were no statistical differences between facilities that achieved a clinically meaningful improvement (≥10%) or a desired prevalence of vitamin D supplement use (80% of residents) compared to those that did not. CONCLUSIONS: This work confirms the complex nature of implementation of best practice in the RACF setting and indicates that more needs to be done to ensure best practice is translated into action. Whilst some strategies appeared to be associated with better outcomes, the statistical insignificance of these findings and the overall limited impact of the intervention suggests that the role of broader organisational and governmental support for implementation should be investigated further. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered (ANZCTR ID: ACTRN12616000782437 ).

People living in nursing care facilities who are ambulant and fracture their hips: description of usual care and an alternative rehabilitation pathway.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about treatment provided to people living in nursing care facilities (NCFs) after hospital admission for hip fracture. In addition, there are no clinical guidelines for rehabilitation and recovery following hip fracture for nursing home residents. METHODS: As part of a randomised trial (SACRED trial), which investigated the efficacy of a four week in-reach rehabilitation program, data were collected which described routine care for 240 people living in 76 nursing care facilities in South Australia who fractured their hips. The in-reach rehabilitation provided to 119 intervention participants is described, including intensity, type and methods used to encourage participation in rehabilitation. Adverse events that occurred, in particular falls, are also reported. RESULTS: NCF records indicated that, over the four weeks following discharge from hospital after hip fracture, 76% of patients receiving usual care had a consultation with their general practitioner. Physiotherapy was provided to 79% of patients in usual care (median of 1.96 h over the 4 weeks, which is less than 30 min each week of physiotherapy). In-reach rehabilitation was provided by the hospital team for 13 h over the 4 weeks with almost full attendance at physiotherapy sessions (median of 1 missed session, range 0-7 with a median of 14 physiotherapy sessions attended by participants, range 1-18). Experienced therapists provided a flexible approach to the rehabilitation to account for patients' dementia and associated neuropsychiatric symptoms while providing dietetic support, mobility training and education to nursing home staff. The number of falls experienced by those in the intervention group was higher compared to those in usual care (Relative Risk 1.38 (95%CI 1.04-1.84, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Rehabilitation can be provided to people living in NCFs following hip fracture, even when they have moderate to severe dementia but the model needs to be flexible. Provision of rehabilitation may increase the rate of falls in this population. Further studies are required to establish the feasibility of the intervention in other long term care settings. (327 words). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12612000112864 registered on the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR).

Should we provide outreach rehabilitation to very old people living in Nursing Care Facilities after a hip fracture? A randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: to determine whether a 4-week postoperative rehabilitation program delivered in Nursing Care Facilities (NCFs) would improve quality of life and mobility compared with receiving usual care. DESIGN: parallel randomised controlled trial with integrated health economic study. SETTING: NCFs, in Adelaide South Australia. SUBJECTS: people aged 70 years and older who were recovering from hip fracture surgery and were walking prior to hip fracture. MEASUREMENTS: primary outcomes: mobility (Nursing Home Life-Space Diameter (NHLSD)) and quality of life (DEMQOL) at 4 weeks and 12 months. RESULTS: participants were randomised to treatment (n = 121) or control (n = 119) groups. At 4 weeks, the treatment group had better mobility (NHLSD mean difference -1.9; 95% CI: -3.3, -0.57; P = 0.0055) and were more likely to be alive (log rank test P = 0.048) but there were no differences in quality of life. At 12 months, the treatment group had better quality of life (DEMQOL sum score mean difference = -7.4; 95% CI: -12.5 to -2.3; P = 0.0051), but there were no other differences between treatment and control groups. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained over 12 months were 0.0063 higher per participant (95% CI: -0.0547 to 0.0686). The resulting incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were $5,545 Australian dollars per unit increase in the NHLSD (95% CI: $244 to $15,159) and $328,685 per QALY gained (95% CI: $82,654 to $75,007,056). CONCLUSIONS: the benefits did not persist once the rehabilitation program ended but quality of life at 12 months in survivors was slightly higher. The case for funding outreach home rehabilitation in NCFs is weak from a traditional health economic perspective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12612000112864 registered on the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. Trial protocol available at https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id = 361980.