Health Care Is Not Enough to Prevent Dementia.

With an aging population, an increase in cases of Alzheimer's disease and dementia worldwide poses a significant health burden. While we hope for a cure, preventing dementia by reducing risks is important for global population health. Prevention strategies are difficult to implement when facing inequality across the world for access to healthy lifestyles. An approach that centers on individual responsibility and health professional interventions for targeted groups may risk missing the policy and environmental drivers of change. Barriers and enablers need to be explored and interventions are needed at individual, structural and social levels to normalize mid-life risk reduction.

Factors that influence the implementation of innovation in aged care: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to identify factors that influence the implementation of innovation in aged care. INTRODUCTION: Aged care is a dynamic sector experiencing rapid change. Implementation of innovations in aged care has received relatively little research attention compared to health care. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review included studies of any design, that examined the implementation of innovations in aged care settings. METHODS: Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, AgeLine, and ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection for studies published between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2022. The titles and abstracts of retrieved citations were screened by two independent reviewers. Full-text articles were screened by one reviewer to determine inclusion. Data were extracted in NVivo using a tool developed by the research team. Factors that influenced implementation were inductively coded, interpreted, and grouped into categories in a series of workshops. RESULTS: Of the 2530 studies that were screened, 193 were included. Of the included papers, the majority (74%) related to residential aged care, 28% used an implementation theory or framework, and 15% involved consumers. Five key categories of factors influencing implementation were identified: organizational context including resourcing and culture; people's attitudes and capabilities; relationships between people; the intervention and its appropriateness; and implementation actions such as stakeholder engagement and implementation strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings can be used to develop practical resources to support implementation efforts, and highlight the importance of resourcing for successful implementation. Attention to community-based aged care, and greater engagement with theory and community is needed to promote research rigor, relevance and applicability.

Consumer and Healthcare Professional Led Priority Setting for Quality Use of Medicines in People with Dementia: Gathering Unanswered Research Questions.

BACKGROUND: Historically, research questions have been posed by the pharmaceutical industry or researchers, with little involvement of consumers and healthcare professionals. OBJECTIVE: To determine what questions about medicine use are important to people living with dementia and their care team and whether they have been previously answered by research. METHODS: The James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership process was followed. A national Australian qualitative survey on medicine use in people living with dementia was conducted with consumers (people living with dementia and their carers including family, and friends) and healthcare professionals. Survey findings were supplemented with key informant interviews and relevant published documents (identified by the research team). Conventional content analysis was used to generate summary questions. Finally, evidence checking was conducted to determine if the summary questions were 'unanswered'. RESULTS: A total of 545 questions were submitted by 228 survey participants (151 consumers and 77 healthcare professionals). Eight interviews were conducted with key informants and four relevant published documents were identified and reviewed. Overall, analysis resulted in 68 research questions, grouped into 13 themes. Themes with the greatest number of questions were related to co-morbidities, adverse drug reactions, treatment of dementia, and polypharmacy. Evidence checking resulted in 67 unanswered questions. CONCLUSION: A wide variety of unanswered research questions were identified. Addressing unanswered research questions identified by consumers and healthcare professionals through this process will ensure that areas of priority are targeted in future research to achieve optimal health outcomes through quality use of medicines.

Characterising trauma-informed aged care: An appreciative inquiry approach.

OBJECTIVE: While Trauma-informed care (TIC) has the potential to improve the quality of aged and dementia care, the challenge remains in translating the principles of TIC into practice. This study aimed to characterise what trauma-informed aged care looks like in practice, by learning from an aged care service acknowledged as delivering trauma-informed aged care effectively. METHOD: We conducted an appreciative inquiry study within a residential aged care service catering for veterans and others with trauma histories. Observation of care behaviours, interviews with staff and residents, and organisational policy mapping were used to identify elements that maximised care safety and accessibility for trauma survivors. Data were analysed and triangulated using a framework analysis approach. RESULTS: The aged care provider embedded the principles of TIC into its staff training (i) to promote understanding of how trauma may affect experiences in care, and (ii) to adapt care when appropriate to promote safety. The service promoted a calm atmosphere where residents could make choices and felt safe. Uniforms and signage provided consistency, clarity, and transparency for residents. Staff behaviours demonstrated respect, fostered trust, and anticipated needs without unnecessarily imposing care. Staff consistently offered choices, used residents' names, sought permission before providing care, and offered reassurance. Staff reported high morale with a commitment to delivering high quality care, and feedback to management. Effective communication promoted information sharing and trust among staff. CONCLUSION: Trauma-informed practice was facilitated through organisational policy, a dignified environment, and thoughtful staff behaviour creating safety, choice, and control for residents.

Methods of Capturing Process Outcomes in Quality Improvement Trials: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: Healthcare quality can be measured by studying structure, processes, and outcomes. This study examines how trialists capture process outcomes in implementation trials to provide guidance for researchers and health professionals. Electronic databases were searched, and two researchers performed the title, abstract, and full-text selection. Only implementation studies involving nonpharmacological approaches were included. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked for accuracy and completeness by a second reviewer. Study quality was independently assessed by two reviewers. Of the 3,186 articles screened, 24 studies matched our inclusion criteria. Most studies were cluster randomized control trials, followed by interrupted time series studies and stepped wedge studies. The population in the studies was diverse and settings included hospitals, community centers, residential aged care facilities, and primary care. The reporting of process measures across the included studies varied, and there was limited information about the mechanisms of data collection procedures. Nineteen studies extracted information about processes from electronic medical records, patient records, or chart reviews. The remaining five studies used staff surveys. Challenges remain in the practical aspect of data collection for measuring process outcomes, particularly outside of hospital settings or where processes are hard to capture in patient records.

How, why and under what circumstances does a quality improvement collaborative build knowledge and skills in clinicians working with people with dementia? A realist informed process evaluation.

In increasingly constrained health and aged care services, strategies are needed to improve quality and translate evidence into practice. In dementia care, recent failures in quality and safety have led the WHO to prioritise the translation of known evidence into practice. While quality improvement collaboratives have been widely used in healthcare, there are few examples in dementia care.We describe a recent quality improvement collaborative to improve dementia care across Australia and assess the implementation outcomes of acceptability and feasibility of this strategy to translate known evidence into practice. A realist-informed process evaluation was used to analyse how, why and under what circumstances a quality improvement collaborative built knowledge and skills in clinicians working in dementia care.This realist-informed process evaluation developed, tested and refined the programme theory of a quality improvement collaborative. Data were collected pre-intervention and post-intervention using surveys and interviews with participants (n=28). A combined inductive and deductive data analysis process integrated three frameworks to examine the context and mechanisms of knowledge and skill building in participant clinicians.A refined program theory showed how and why clinicians built knowledge and skills in quality improvement in dementia care. Six mechanisms were identified: motivation, accountability, identity, collective learning, credibility and reflective practice. These mechanisms, in combination, operated to overcome constraints, role boundaries and pessimism about improved practice in dementia care.A quality improvement collaborative designed for clinicians in different contexts and roles was acceptable and feasible in building knowledge, skills and confidence of clinicians to improve dementia care. Supportive reflective practice and a credible, flexible and collaborative process optimised quality improvement knowledge and skills in clinicians working with people with dementia.Trial registration numberACTRN12618000268246.

Improving adherence to guideline recommendations in dementia care through establishing a quality improvement collaborative of agents of change: an interrupted time series study.

BACKGROUND: Non-pharmacological interventions including physical activity programmes, occupational therapy and caregiver education programmes have been shown to lead to better outcomes for people with dementia and their care partners. Yet, there are gaps between what is recommended in guidelines and what happens in practice. The aim of this study was to bring together clinicians working in dementia care and establish a quality improvement collaborative. The aim of the quality improvement collaborative was to increase self-reported guideline adherence to three guideline recommendations. METHODS: Interrupted time series. We recruited health professionals from community, hospital and aged care settings across Australia to join the collaborative. Members of the collaborative participated in a start-up meeting, completed an online learning course with clinical and quality improvement content, formed a quality improvement plan which was reviewed by a team of experts, received feedback following an audit of their current practice and were able to share experiences with their peers. The primary outcome was self-reported adherence to their guideline recommendation of interest which was measured using checklists. Data were collected monthly over a period of 18 months, and the study used an interrupted time series design and multilevel Poisson regression analysis to evaluate changes in self-reported adherence. RESULTS: A total of 45 health professionals (78% therapists) from different sites joined the collaborative and 28 completed all requirements. Data from 1717 checklists were included in the analyses. Over the duration of the project, there was a significant increase in clinician self-reported adherence to guideline recommendations with a 42.1% immediate increase in adherence (incidence rate ratio = 1.42; 95% confidence interval = 1.08-1.87; p = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Health professionals working with people with dementia are interested in and willing to join a quality improvement collaborative with the goal of improving non-pharmacological aspects of care. Participation in the collaborative improved the quality of care for people with dementia as measured through self-reported adherence to guideline recommendations. Although there are challenges in implementation of guideline recommendations within dementia care, the quality improvement collaborative method was considered successful. A strength was that it equipped and empowered clinicians to lead improvement activities and allowed for heterogeneity in terms of service and setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12618000268246.

Costs and economic evaluations of Quality Improvement Collaboratives in healthcare: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In increasingly constrained healthcare budgets worldwide, efforts to improve quality and reduce costs are vital. Quality Improvement Collaboratives (QICs) are often used in healthcare settings to implement proven clinical interventions within local and national programs. The cost of this method of implementation, however, is cited as a barrier to use. This systematic review aims to identify and describe studies reporting on costs and cost-effectiveness of QICs when used to implement clinical guidelines in healthcare. METHODS: Multiple databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, EconLit and ProQuest) were searched for economic evaluations or cost studies of QICs in healthcare. Studies were included if they reported on economic evaluations or costs of QICs. Two authors independently reviewed citations and full text papers. Key characteristics of eligible studies were extracted, and their quality assessed against the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). Evers CHEC-List was used for full economic evaluations. Cost-effectiveness findings were interpreted through the Johanna Briggs Institute 'three by three dominance matrix tool' to guide conclusions. Currencies were converted to United States dollars for 2018 using OECD and World Bank databases. RESULTS: Few studies reported on costs or economic evaluations of QICs despite their use in healthcare. Eight studies across multiple healthcare settings in acute and long-term care, community addiction treatment and chronic disease management were included. Five were considered good quality and favoured the establishment of QICs as cost-effective implementation methods. The cost savings to the healthcare setting identified in these studies outweighed the cost of the collaborative itself. CONCLUSIONS: Potential cost savings to the health care system in both acute and chronic conditions may be possible by applying QICs at scale. However, variations in effectiveness, costs and elements of the method within studies, indicated that caution is needed. Consistent identification of costs and description of the elements applied in QICs would better inform decisions for their use and may reduce perceived barriers. Lack of studies with negative findings may have been due to publication bias. Future research should include economic evaluations with societal perspectives of costs and savings and the cost-effectiveness of elements of QICs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018107417.

Post-diagnostic allied health interventions for people with dementia in Australia: a spotlight on current practice.

OBJECTIVE: The Clinical Practice Guidelines for Dementia in Australia provide evidence-based recommendations for the assessment, diagnosis, and care of people with dementia and their informal carers. The extent to which current Australian post-diagnosis care reflects these recommendations is not well understood. This brief report provides a snapshot of current practice related to three key recommendations from the Guidelines: occupational therapy, exercise, and informal carer support. RESULTS: Nursing (n = 3) and allied health clinicians (n = 29) provided data about 1114 consultations with people with dementia and/or informal carers over a 9-month study period. Results showed that delivery of evidence-based dementia care remains a significant challenge in Australia. Clinicians found it difficult to tailor exercise interventions to overcome cognitive and organisational barriers to adherence during and between consultations. Occupational therapists primarily focussed on functional assessment rather than on delivering evidence-based interventions. Clinicians also found it difficult to identify and address the array of needs reported by informal carers, especially when the person with dementia is present during the consultation. Though these results are reported by a selected sample, they emphasise the need for innovative knowledge translation strategies to facilitate widespread quality improvement in post-diagnosis dementia care. Trial registration Registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry 21 February 2018 (ACTRN12618000268246).

Agents of change: establishing quality improvement collaboratives to improve adherence to Australian clinical guidelines for dementia care.

BACKGROUND: Dissemination of clinical practice guidelines alone is insufficient to create meaningful change in clinical practice. Quality improvement collaborative models have potential to address the evidence-practice gap in dementia care because they capitalise on known knowledge translation enablers and incorporate optimal approaches to implementation. Non-pharmacological interventions focused on promoting independence are effective and favoured by people with dementia and their carers but are not routinely implemented. The objective of this translational project is to assess the impact of quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) on adherence to non-pharmacological recommendations from the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Dementia in Australia. METHODS: This project will employ an interrupted time-series design with process evaluation to assess the impact, uptake, feasibility, accessibility, cost, and sustainability of the QICs over 18 months. Thirty clinicians from across Australia will be invited to join the QICs to build their capacity in leading innovation in dementia care. Clinicians will participate in a training program and be supported to develop and implement a quality improvement project unique to their service context using plan-do-study-act cycles. Regular online meetings with their peers in the QIC will facilitate benchmarking and problem-solving. Clinicians will describe their practice via monthly checklists, and guideline adherence will be determined against a set of defined criteria. Phone interviews with up to 180 client dyads will be used to assess satisfaction with care and client outcomes. Clinician interviews and field note data will be used to explore implementation and costs. Involvement of people with dementia and carers will be embedded in the study design, conduct, and reporting, in addition to clinical and industry expertise. DISCUSSION: The quality of dementia care in Australia is largely dependent on the clinician involved and the extent to which they apply best available evidence in their practice. This study will determine the elements of this multifaceted implementation strategy that contributed to guideline adherence and client outcomes. The findings will inform future translational approaches to improving care and outcomes for people with dementia and their carers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry 21 February 2018 ( ACTRN12618000268246 ).