Survival and critical care use among people with dementia in a large English cohort.

BACKGROUND: Admitting people with dementia to critical care units may not always lead to a clear survival benefit. Critical care admissions of people with dementia vary across countries. Little is known about the use and trends of critical care admissions of people with dementia in England. OBJECTIVE: To investigate critical care use and survival among people with dementia in a large London catchment area. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using data from dementia assessment services in south London, UK (2007-20) linked with national hospitalisation data to ascertain critical care admissions. Outcomes included age-sex-standardised critical care use and 1-year post-critical care admission survival by dementia severity (binary: mild versus moderate/severe). We used logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier survival plots for investigating 1-year survival following a critical care admission and linear regressions for time trends. RESULTS: Of 19,787 people diagnosed with dementia, 726 (3.7%) had ≥1 critical care admission at any time after receiving their dementia diagnosis. The overall 1-year survival of people with dementia, who had a CCA, was 47.5% (n = 345). Dementia severity was not associated with 1-year survival following a critical care admission (mild dementia versus moderate-severe dementia odds of 1-year mortality OR: 0.90, 95% CI [0.66-1.22]). Over the 12-year period from 2008 to 2019, overall critical care use decreased (ß = -0.05; 95% CI = -0.01, -0.0003; P = 0.03), while critical care admissions occurring during the last year of life increased (ß = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.20, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, while critical care use among people with dementia declined overall, its use increased among those in their last year of life. Survival remains comparable to that observed in general older populations.

Patterns of unplanned hospital admissions among people with dementia: from diagnosis to the end of life.

BACKGROUND: hospitalisations are sentinel events for people with dementia. How patterns of unplanned hospital admissions change among people with dementia after diagnosis is relatively unknown. OBJECTIVE: to describe patterns of unplanned hospital admissions of people with dementia from diagnosis until death/study end. METHODS: retrospective cohort study using mental healthcare provider data of people diagnosed with dementia in London, UK (1995-2017), linked to mortality and hospital data. The primary outcome was the rate of unplanned hospital admissions after diagnosis until death/study end. We calculated the cumulative incidence of unplanned hospital admissions. The rates of unplanned hospital admissions and the percentage of time spent as an inpatient were stratified by time from first dementia diagnosis. RESULTS: for 19,221 people with dementia (61.4% female, mean age at diagnosis 81.0 years (standard deviation, SD 8.5)), the cumulative incidence of unplanned hospital admissions (n = 14,759) was 76.8% (95% CI 76.3%-77.3%). Individuals remained in the study for mean 3.0 (SD 2.6) years, and 12,667 (65.9%) died. Rates and lengths of unplanned hospital admissions remained relatively low and short in the months after the dementia diagnosis, increasing only as people approached the end of life. Percentage of time spent as an inpatient was <3% for people who were alive at the study end but was on average 19.6 and 13.3% for the decedents in the last 6 and 12 months of life, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: the steep rise in hospitalisations before death highlights the need for improved community care and services for people with dementia who are approaching the end of life.

Implementation of eHealth to Support Assessment and Decision-making for Residents With Dementia in Long-term Care: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: As dementia progresses, symptoms and concerns increase, causing considerable distress for the person and their caregiver. The integration of care between care homes and health care services is vital to meet increasing care needs and maintain quality of life. However, care home access to high-quality health care is inequitable. eHealth can facilitate this by supporting remote specialist input on care processes, such as clinical assessment and decision-making, and streamlining care on site. How to best implement eHealth in the care home setting is unclear. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to identify the key factors that influence the implementation of eHealth for people living with dementia in long-term care. METHODS: A systematic search of Embase, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and CINAHL was conducted to identify studies published between 2000 and 2020. Studies were eligible if they focused on eHealth interventions to improve treatment and care assessment or decision-making for residents with dementia in care homes. Data were thematically analyzed and deductively mapped onto the 6 constructs of the adapted Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The results are presented as a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 29 studies were included, focusing on a variety of eHealth interventions, including remote video consultations and clinical decision support tools. Key factors that influenced eHealth implementation were identified across all 6 constructs of the CFIR. Most concerned the inner setting construct on requirements for implementation in the care home, such as providing a conducive learning climate, engaged leadership, and sufficient training and resources. A total of 4 novel subconstructs were identified to inform the implementation requirements to meet resident needs and engage end users. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing eHealth in care homes for people with dementia is multifactorial and complex, involving interaction between residents, staff, and organizations. It requires an emphasis on the needs of residents and the engagement of end users in the implementation process. A novel conceptual model of the key factors was developed and translated into 18 practical recommendations on the implementation of eHealth in long-term care to guide implementers or innovators in care homes. Successful implementation of eHealth is required to maximize uptake and drive improvements in integrated health and social care.

The association between ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation and receipt of hospital-based palliative care for people with Covid-19: A dual centre service evaluation.

BACKGROUND: People from ethnic minority groups and deprived socioeconomic backgrounds have worse outcomes from COVID-19. AIM: To examine associations between ethnicity and deprivation with timing of palliative care referral for inpatients with COVID-19. DESIGN: Service evaluation of consecutive patients with COVID-19 referred to palliative care. Sociodemographic (including age, sex, Index of Multiple Deprivation, ethnicity coded as White/non-White) and clinical variables were described. The primary outcome was timing of referral to palliative care. Associations between ethnicity and socioeconomic deprivation with the primary outcome were explored using multivariable regression. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Patients with COVID-19 referred to a hospital palliative care service across two London hospitals February-May 2020. RESULTS: A total of 334 patients were included. 119 (36%) were from a non-White ethnic group; most commonly Black British (77, 23%) and Asian British (26, 8%). A longer time between admission and palliative care referral was associated with male gender (IRR 1.23, 95% CI 1.14-1.34) and lower levels of socioeconomic deprivation (IRR 1.61, 95% CI 1.36-1.90) but not ethnicity (IRR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.87-1.06). CONCLUSIONS: This large service evaluation showed no evidence that patients from ethnic minority or more deprived socioeconomic groups had longer time to palliative care referral. Ongoing data monitoring is essential for equitable service delivery.

Understanding usual care in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions: A multi-method approach.

BACKGROUND: Evaluations of complex interventions compared to usual care provided in palliative care are increasing. Not describing usual care may affect the interpretation of an intervention's effectiveness, yet how it can be described remains unclear. AIM: To demonstrate the feasibility of using multi-methods to describe usual care provided in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of complex interventions, shown within a feasibility cluster RCT. DESIGN: Multi-method approach comprising usual care questionnaires, baseline case note review and focus groups with ward staff completed at study end. Thematic analysis of qualitative data, descriptive statistics of quantitative data, followed by methodological triangulation to appraise approach in relation to study aim. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Four general medical wards chosen from UK hospitals. Purposive sampling of healthcare professionals for usual care questionnaires, and focus groups. Review of 20 patients' notes from each ward who died during admission or within 100 days of discharge. RESULTS: Twenty-three usual care questionnaires at baseline, two focus groups comprising 20 healthcare professionals and 80 case note reviews. Triangulation of findings resulted in understanding the usual care provided to the targeted population in terms of context, structures, processes and outcomes for patients, families and healthcare professionals. Usual care was described, highlighting (1) similarities and embedded practices, (2) heterogeneity and (3) subtle changes in care during the trial within and across sites. CONCLUSIONS: We provide a feasible approach to defining usual care that can be practically adopted in different settings. Understanding usual care enhances the reliability of tested complex interventions, and informs research and policy priorities.

How do person-centered outcome measures enable shared decision-making for people with dementia and family carers?-A systematic review.

Objectives: To identify published evidence on person-centered outcome measures (PCOMs) used in dementia care and to explore how PCOMs facilitate shared decision-making and improve outcomes of care. To build a logic model based on the findings, depicting linkages with PCOM impact mechanisms and care outcomes. Design: Mixed-methods systematic review. We searched PsycINFO, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and ASSIA from databases and included studies reporting experiences and/or impact of PCOM use among people with dementia, family carers, and/or practitioners. Groen Van de Ven's model of collaborative deliberation informed the elements of shared decision-making in dementia care in the abstraction, analysis, and interpretation of data. Data were narratively synthesized to develop the logic model. Setting: Studies were conducted in long-term care, mixed settings, emergency department, general primary care, and geriatric clinics. Participants: A total of 1064 participants were included in the review. Results: Ten studies were included. PCOMs can facilitate shared decision-making through "knowing the person," "identifying problems, priorities for care and treatment and goal setting," "evaluating decisions", and "implementation considerations for PCOM use." Weak evidence on the impact of PCOMs to improve communication between individuals and practitioners, physical function, and activities of daily living. Conclusions: PCOMs can enable shared decision-making and impact outcomes through facilitating collaborative working between the person's network of family and practitioners to identify and manage symptoms and concerns. The constructed logic model demonstrates the key mechanisms to discuss priorities for care and treatment, and to evaluate decisions and outcomes. A future area of research is training for family carers to use PCOMs with practitioners.

Quality indicators for dementia and older people nearing the end of life: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Robust quality indicators (QIs) are essential for monitoring and improving the quality of care and learning from good practice. We aimed to identify and assess QIs for the care of older people and people with dementia who are nearing the end of life and recommend QIs for use with routinely collected electronic data across care settings. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, including five databases and reference chaining. Studies describing the development of QIs for care of older people and those with dementia nearing the end of life were included. QIs were categorized as relating to processes or outcomes, and mapped against six care domains. The psychometric properties (acceptability, evidence base, definition, feasibility, reliability, and validity) of each QI were assessed; QIs were categorized as robust, moderate, or poor. RESULTS: From 12,980 titles and abstracts screened, 37 papers and 976 QIs were included. Process and outcome QIs accounted for 780 (79.7%) and 196 (20.3%) of all QIs, respectively. Many of the QIs concerned physical aspects of care (n = 492, 50.4%), and very few concerned spiritual and cultural aspects of care (n = 19, 1.9%). Three hundred and fifteen (32.3%) QIs were robust and of those 220 were measurable using routinely collected electronic data. The final shortlist of 71 QIs came from seven studies. CONCLUSIONS: Of the numerous QIs developed for care of older adults and those with dementia nearing the end of life, most had poor or moderate psychometric properties or were not designed for use with routinely collected electronic datasets. Infrastructure for data availability, combined with use of robust QIs, is important for enhancing understanding of care provided to this population, identifying unmet needs, and improving service provision.

Factors Associated With Emergency Department Visits by People With Dementia Near the End of Life: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) attendance is common among people with dementia and increases toward the end of life. The aim was to systematically review factors associated with ED attendance among people with dementia approaching the end of life. DESIGN: Systematic search of 6 databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, ASSIA, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science) and gray literature. Quantitative studies of any design were eligible. Newcastle-Ottawa Scales and Cochrane risk-of-bias tools assessed study quality. Extracted data were reported narratively, using a theoretical model. Factors were synthesized based on strength of evidence using vote counting (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020193271). SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Adults with dementia of any subtype and severity, in the last year of life, or in receipt of services indicative of nearness to end of life. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was ED attendance, defined as attending a medical facility that provides 24-hour access to emergency care, with full resuscitation resources. RESULTS: After de-duplication, 18,204 titles and abstracts were screened, 367 were selected for full-text review and 23 studies were included. There was high-strength evidence that ethnic minority groups, increasing number of comorbidities, neuropsychiatric symptoms, previous hospital transfers, and rural living were positively associated with ED attendance, whereas higher socioeconomic position, being unmarried, and living in a care home were negatively associated with ED attendance. There was moderate-strength evidence that being a woman and receiving palliative care were negatively associated with ED attendance. There was only low-strength evidence for factors associated with repeat ED attendance. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The review highlights characteristics that could help identify patients at risk of ED attendance near the end of life and potential service-related factors to reduce risks. Better understanding of the mechanisms by which residential facilities and palliative care are associated with reduced ED attendance is needed.

Exploring costs, cost components, and associated factors among people with dementia approaching the end of life: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding costs of care for people dying with dementia is essential to guide service development, but information has not been systematically reviewed. We aimed to understand (1) which cost components have been measured in studies reporting the costs of care in people with dementia approaching the end of life, (2) what the costs are and how they change closer to death, and (3) which factors are associated with these costs. METHODS: We searched the electronic databases CINAHL, Medline, Cochrane, Web of Science, EconLit, and Embase and reference lists of included studies. We included any type of study published between 1999 and 2019, in any language, reporting primary data on costs of health care in individuals with dementia approaching the end of life. Two independent reviewers screened all full-text articles. We used the Evers' Consensus on Health Economic Criteria checklist to appraise the risk of bias of included studies. RESULTS: We identified 2843 articles after removing duplicates; 19 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 16 were from the United States. Only two studies measured informal costs including out-of-pocket expenses and informal caregiving. The monthly total direct cost of care rose toward death, from $1787 to $2999 USD in the last 12 months, to $4570 to $11921 USD in the last month of life. Female sex, Black ethnicity, higher educational background, more comorbidities, and greater cognitive impairment were associated with higher costs. DISCUSSION: Costs of dementia care rise closer to death. Informal costs of care are high but infrequently included in analyses. Research exploring the costs of care for people with dementia by proximity to death, including informal care costs and from outside the United States, is urgently needed.

Implementation of a complex intervention to improve care for patients whose situations are clinically uncertain in hospital settings: A multi-method study using normalisation process theory.

PURPOSE: To examine the use of Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to establish if, and in what ways, the AMBER care bundle can be successfully normalised into acute hospital practice, and to identify necessary modifications to optimise its implementation. METHOD: Multi-method process evaluation embedded within a mixed-method feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial in two district general hospitals in England. Data were collected using (i) focus groups with health professionals (HPs), (ii) semi-structured interviews with patients and/or carers, (iii) non-participant observations of multi-disciplinary team meetings and (iv) patient clinical note review. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics, with interpretation guided by NPT components (coherence; cognitive participation; collective action; reflexive monitoring). Data triangulated across sources. RESULTS: Two focus groups (26 HPs), nine non-participant observations, 12 interviews (two patients, 10 relatives), 29 clinical note reviews were conducted. While coherence was evident, with HPs recognising the value of the AMBER care bundle, cognitive participation and collective action presented challenges. Specifically: (1) HPs were unable and unwilling to operationalise the concept of 'risk of dying' intervention eligibility criteria (2) integration relied on a 'champion' to drive participation and ensure sustainability; and (3) differing skills and confidence led to variable engagement with difficult conversations with patients and families about, for example, nearness to end of life. Opportunities for reflexive monitoring were not routinely embedded within the intervention. Reflections on the use of the AMBER care bundle from HPs and patients and families, including recommended modifications became evident through this NPT-driven analysis. CONCLUSION: To be successfully normalised, new clinical practices, such as the AMBER care bundle, must be studied within the wider context in which they operate. NPT can be used to the aid identification of practical strategies to assist in normalisation of complex interventions where the focus of care is on clinical uncertainty in acute hospital settings.

The AMBER care bundle for hospital inpatients with uncertain recovery nearing the end of life: the ImproveCare feasibility cluster RCT.

BACKGROUND: Patients admitted to hospital with a terminal illness and uncertain recovery often receive inconsistent care and do not have the opportunity to die in their preferred place of death. Previous end-of-life care packages, such as the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient, have sometimes been badly implemented. The AMBER (Assessment; Management; Best practice; Engagement; Recovery uncertain) care bundle was developed to remedy this. It has not been evaluated in a randomised trial, but a definitive trial would face many hurdles. OBJECTIVE: To optimise the design of and determine the feasibility of a pragmatic, multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial of the AMBER care bundle compared with best standard care. DESIGN: A feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial including semistructured interviews with patients and relatives, focus groups with health-care professionals, non-participant observations of multidisciplinary team meetings, a standard care survey, heat maps and case note reviews. Retrospective data were collected from the family or close friends of deceased patients via a bereavement survey. SETTING: Four general medical wards at district general hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: There were 65 participants (control, n = 36; intervention, n = 29). There were 24 interviews, four focus groups, 15 non-participant meeting observations, six case note reviews and three heat maps, and 15 of out 23 bereavement, standard care surveys were completed. INTERVENTION: The AMBER care bundle is implemented by a nurse facilitator. It includes the development and documentation of a medical plan, consideration of outcomes, resuscitation and escalation status and daily plan revisiting. The AMBER care bundle encourages staff, patients and families to talk openly about their preferences and priorities should the worst happen. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two 'candidate' primary outcomes were selected to be evaluated for a future definitive trial: Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale patient/family anxiety and communication subscale and 'howRwe'. The secondary outcome measures were Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale symptoms, Australian-modified Karnofsky Performance Status scale, EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, Client Service Receipt Inventory, recruitment rate, intervention fidelity and intervention acceptability. RESULTS: Data were collected for 65 patients. This trial was not powered to measure clinical effectiveness, but variance and changes observed in the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale subscale indicated that this measure would probably detect differences within a definitive trial. It was feasible to collect data on health, social and informal care service use and on quality of life at two time points. The AMBER care bundle was broadly acceptable to all stakeholders and was delivered as planned. The emphasis on 'clinical uncertainty' prompted health-care professional awareness of often-overlooked patients. Reviewing patients' AMBER care bundle status was integrated into routine practice. Refinements included simplifying the inclusion criteria and improving health-care professional communication training. Improvements to trial procedures included extending the time devoted to recruitment and simplifying consent procedures. There was also a recommendation to reduce data collected from patients and relatives to minimise burden. LIMITATIONS: The recruitment rate was lower than anticipated. The inclusion criteria for the trial were difficult to interpret. Information sheets and consent procedures were too detailed and lengthy for the target population. Health-care professionals' enthusiasm and specialty were not considered while picking trial wards. Participant recruitment took place later during hospital admission and the majority of participants were lost to follow-up because they had been discharged. Those who participated may have different characteristics from those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: This feasibility trial has demonstrated that an evaluation of the AMBER care bundle among an acutely unwell patient population, although technically possible, is not practical or feasible. The intervention requires optimisation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN36040085. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Portfolio registration number 32682. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 55. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Unwell hospital patients who are approaching the end of their lives and may die at any moment receive inconsistent care and often do not have opportunities to discuss their future care preferences. The AMBER (Assessment; Management; Best practice; Engagement; Recovery uncertain) care bundle was developed to help identify such patients, train health-care professionals to better communicate their concerns with them and their families and, where possible, to realise their preferences for place of care and death. The Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient, previously used across England, was designed to provide the best possible quality of care to those at the end of life. However, an independent review identified that it often was not used appropriately, leading to poor patient outcomes. A number of the criticisms of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient, such as reports of quickened deaths from the withdrawal of hydration/nutrition, as well as poor communication with patients and families, may have been identified earlier if it had been thoroughly evaluated. The AMBER care bundle, developed at Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital, aims to provide better outcomes for patients with clinically uncertain recovery and their families. It is important that the AMBER care bundle is properly investigated before wider use. A bigger study of the AMBER care bundle would be complex and expensive, so we examined whether or not this would be possible and acceptable to patients cared for in four wards across four hospitals, before deciding whether or not to go ahead with this bigger study. Two wards used the care bundle and two did not. We interviewed participants, their families and staff, and examined participants' clinical notes. We found that the AMBER care bundle was largely acceptable to patients, relatives and staff, and generally delivered as intended. We successfully collected information from 65 unwell patients at the beginning of the trial and again 3­5 and 10­15 days later. However, a limited number of data were collected at the final time point (10­15 days) due to many participants being discharged from the hospital. Group discussions with staff and interviews with participants and relatives identified important changes required to improve the AMBER care bundle and views on how the trial was conducted. These included simplifying the type of patients who may be appropriate for the AMBER care bundle and improving communication training for staff. Although we identified that a further study was technically possible, it is currently impractical. Future solutions that would require further testing include focusing on clinical need rather than trying to guess how the patient's condition will develop to identify potential trial participants and using questions completed by the patients as part of their routine care as a source of information. In the meantime, the AMBER care bundle continues to be used in over 40 hospitals in England.