Medication Costs and Use of Older Americans in Assisted Living Settings: a Nationally Representative Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Assisted-living (AL) settings are an important residential care option for old and disabled Americans, but there are no national data characterizing medication use in AL. OBJECTIVE: To investigate medication costs and use of older adults living in the AL settings compared to those in the community, independent living, and nursing home settings. DESIGN: 2015 National Health and Aging Trends Study; nationally representative cross-sectional study. PATICIPANTS: Respondents ≥ 65 years with Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage (n = 5980, representing 32.34 million older adults). MEASURES: Total Part D medication costs; number of 30-day prescription fills; binary indicators for overall polypharmacy (≥ 5 and ≥ 10 concurrent medications), prescription fills of opioid and psychotropic medications including antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, gabapentinoids, antidepressants, and central nervous system-active (CNS-active) polypharmacy. RESULTS: Adjusting for demographics, the annual medication costs among AL residents, at $3890, were twice as high as those of their community-dwelling counterparts ($1932; p < .01). All medication outcomes except opioids were higher for older adults in AL compared to community settings. While the adjusted number of 30-day prescription fills among AL residents was slightly lower than that of nursing home residents (89.5 vs. 106.2; p < .05), AL residents experienced equivalent rates of overall polypharmacy ≥ 10 medications (30.2% vs. 23.5%), antipsychotics (30.8% vs. 27.8%), benzodiazepines (30.7% vs. 32.6%), gabapentinoids (21.2% vs. 16.1%), and CNS-active polypharmacy (26.0% vs. 36.9%; p > .05 for all). Patterns of use across settings were consistent when limited to older adults with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Older Americans in AL experience a prescription medication burden similar to those in nursing homes. AL settings have an important opportunity to ensure their medication-related clinical services and supports match the needs of their residents.

The associations between unmet needs with protective factors, risk factors and outcomes among care partners of community-dwelling persons living with dementia.

OBJECTIVES: Describe the prevalence and types of unmet needs among community-dwelling dementia care partners (CPs) and determine associations between unmet needs with protective factors, risk factors and outcomes. METHOD: A cross-sectional analysis of 638 racially and cognitively diverse community-dwelling persons living with dementia (PLWD) and their CPs participating in a comprehensive in-home assessment of dementia-related needs. Unmet CP needs (19 items, 6 domains) were rated by a clinician using the Johns Hopkins Dementia Care Needs Assessment (JHDCNA). Multivariate linear regression models were used to examine associations between total percent unmet CP needs with demographic, protective and risk factors. RESULTS: Nearly all CPs had at least one unmet need (99.53%), with a mean of 5.7 (±2.6). The most common domains with ≥1 unmet need were memory disorder education, care skills and knowledge of resources (98%), legal issues/concerns (73.8%), CP mental health (44.6%) and access to informal support (42.7%). Adjusted multivariate models suggest the strongest consistent predictive factors relate to informal emotional support, CP physical health, use or difficulty getting formal services/supports (both for CPs and PLWD), and CP time spent with PLWD. Greater levels of unmet needs were associated with worse PLWD outcomes and CP outcomes, after adjusting for demographics. CONCLUSIONS: CPs have high rates of diverse, but modifiable unmet needs. Data suggest optimal approaches to dementia care should take a family-centered home-based approach that includes routine CP needs assessment, offer targeted interventions that include both traditional medical supports as well as strategies to increase and leverage informal social networks, and ones that can bridge and coordinate medical with non-medical supports. These findings can be used to inform new approaches to support CPs, improve PLWD and CP outcomes, and target groups most at risk for inequities.

Acute care utilization risk among older adults living undiagnosed or unaware of dementia.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is associated with increased risk of hospitalization and emergency department (ED) visits. Many persons with dementia are undiagnosed or unaware of their diagnosis, however. Our objective was to determine whether undiagnosed dementia or unawareness affects risk of hospitalization or ED visits. METHODS: Retrospective longitudinal cohort study of 3537 community-living adults age ≥65 enrolled in the 2011-2017 National Health and Aging Trends Study with linked fee-for-service Medicare claims. Using self or proxy reported diagnosis, proxy dementia screening questionnaire, cognitive testing, and Medicare claims diagnosis, participants were classified as having (1) no dementia or dementia, for which they were classified as (2) undiagnosed, (3) diagnosed but unaware, or (4) diagnosed and aware. Proportional hazards models evaluated all-cause and potentially preventable hospitalization and ED visit risk by time-varying dementia status, adjusting for older adult characteristics. RESULTS: Most participants (n = 2879) had no dementia at baseline. Among participants with dementia at baseline (n = 658), 187 were undiagnosed, 300 diagnosed but unaware, and 171 diagnosed and aware. In multivariable adjusted proportional hazards models, persons with undiagnosed dementia had lower risk of hospitalization and ED visits compared to persons diagnosed and aware (all-cause hospitalization aHR 0.59 [0.44, 0.79] and ED visit aHR 0.63 [0.47, 0.85]) and similar risks of these outcomes compared to persons without dementia. Individuals diagnosed but unaware had greater risk compared to those without dementia: aHR 1.37 (1.18, 1.59) for all-cause hospitalization and 1.48 (1.28, 1.71) for ED visits; they experienced risk comparable to individuals diagnosed and aware. CONCLUSION: Older adults with undiagnosed dementia are not at increased risk of acute care utilization after accounting for differences in other characteristics. Individuals unaware of diagnosed dementia demonstrate risk similar to individuals aware of the diagnosis. Increasing diagnosis alone may not affect acute care utilization. The role of awareness warrants further investigation.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of a New psychosocial intervention to support Independence in Dementia (NIDUS-family) for family carers and people living with dementia in their own homes: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most people living with dementia want to remain living in their own homes and are supported to do so by family carers. No interventions have consistently demonstrated improvements to people with dementia's life quality, functioning, or other indices of living as well as possible with dementia. We have co-produced, with health and social care professionals and family carers of people with dementia, a new intervention (NIDUS-family). To our knowledge, NIDUS-family is the first manualised intervention that can be tailored to personal goals of people living with dementia and their families and is delivered by facilitators without clinical training. The intervention utilizes components of behavioural management, carer support, psychoeducation, communication and coping skills training, enablement, and environmental adaptations, with modules selected to address dyads' selected goals. We will evaluate the effect of NIDUS-family and usual care on goal attainment, as measured by Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) rated by family carers, compared to usual care alone at 12-month follow-up. We will also determine whether NIDUS-family and usual care is more cost-effective than usual care alone over 12 months. METHODS: A randomised, two-arm, single-masked, multi-site clinical trial involving 297 people living with dementia-family carer dyads. Dyads will be randomised 2:1 to receive the NIDUS-family intervention with usual care (n = 199) or usual care alone (n = 98). The intervention group will be offered, over 1 year, via 6-8 video call or telephone sessions (or face to face if COVID-19 restrictions allow in the recruitment period) in the initial 6 months, followed by telephone follow-ups every 1-2 months to support implementation, with a trained facilitator. DISCUSSION: Increasing the time lived at home by people living with dementia is likely to benefit lives now and in the future. Our intervention, which we adapted to include remote delivery prior to trial commencement due to the COVID-19 pandemic, aims to address barriers to living as well and as independently as possible that distress people living with dementia, exacerbate family carer(s) stress, negatively affect relationships, lead to safety risks, and frequently precipitate avoidable moves to a care home. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number ISRCTN11425138 . Registered on 7 October 2019.

A longitudinal evaluation of family caregivers' willingness to pay for an in-home nonpharmacologic intervention for people living with dementia: results from a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the willingness-to-pay (WTP) of family caregivers to learn care strategies for persons living with dementia (PLwD). DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Community-dwelling PLwD and their caregivers (dyads) in Maryland and Washington, DC. PARTICIPANTS: 250 dyads. INTERVENTION: Tailored Activity Program (TAP) compared to attention control. TAP provides activities tailored to the PLwD and instructs caregivers in their use. MEASUREMENT: At baseline, 3 and 6 months, caregivers were asked their WTP per session for an 8-session 3-month in-home nonpharmacologic intervention to address behavioral symptoms and functional dependence. RESULTS: At baseline, 3 and 6 months, caregivers assigned to TAP were willing to pay $26.10/session (95%CI:$20.42, $33.00), $28.70 (95%CI:$19.73, $39.30), and $22.79 (95%CI: $16.64, $30.09), respectively; attention control caregivers were willing to pay $37.90/session (95%CI: $27.10, $52.02), $30.92 (95%CI: $23.44, $40.94), $27.44 (95%CI: $20.82, $35.34), respectively. The difference in baseline to 3 and 6 months change in WTP between TAP and the attention control was $9.58 (95%CI: -$5.00, $25.47) and $7.15 (95%CI: -$5.72, $21.81). The difference between TAP and attention control in change in the proportion of caregivers willing to pay something from baseline to 3 and 6 months was -12% (95%CI: -28%, -5%) and -7% (95%CI:-25%, -11%), respectively. The difference in change in WTP, among caregivers willing to pay something, between TAP and attention control from baseline to 3 and 6 months was $17.93 (95%CI: $0.22, $38.30) and $11.81 (95%CI: -$2.57, $28.17). CONCLUSIONS: Family caregivers are willing to pay more for an intervention immediately following participation in a program similar to which they were asked to value.

Cost-Effective Care Coordination for People With Dementia at Home.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: People with dementia (PWD) represent some of the highest-need and highest-cost individuals living in the community. Maximizing Independence (MIND) at Home is a potentially cost-effective and scalable home-based dementia care coordination program that uses trained, nonclinical community workers as the primary contact between the PWD and their care partner, supported by a multidisciplinary clinical team with expertise in dementia care. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Cost of care management services based on actual time spent by care management personnel over first 12 months of MIND at Home intervention was calculated for 342 MIND at Home recipients from Baltimore, Maryland and surrounding areas participating in a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) funded Health Care Innovation Award demonstration project. Difference-in-differences analysis of claims-based Medicaid spending of 120 dually-eligible MIND at Home participants with their propensity score matched comparison group (n = 360). RESULTS: The average cost per enrollee per month was $110, or $1,320 per annum. Medicaid expenditures of dually-eligible participants grew 1.12 percentage points per quarter more slowly than that of the matched comparison group. Most savings came from slower growth in inpatient and long-term nursing home use. Net of the cost of the 5-year MIND at Home intervention, 5-year Medicaid savings are estimated at $7,052 per beneficiary, a 1.12-fold return on investment. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Managed care plans with the flexibility to engage community health workers could benefit from a low-cost, high-touch intervention to meet the needs of enrollees with dementia. Limitations for using and reimbursing community health workers exist in Medicare fee-for-service, which CMS should address to maximize benefit for PWD.

Dementia Family Caregivers' Willingness to Pay for an In-home Program to Reduce Behavioral Symptoms and Caregiver Stress.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to determine whether family caregivers of people with dementia (PwD) are willing to pay for an in-home intervention that provides strategies to manage behavioral symptoms and caregiver stress and to identify predictors of willingness-to-pay (WTP). METHODS: During baseline interviews of a randomized trial and before treatment assignment, caregivers were asked how much they were willing to pay per session for an eight-session program over 3 months. We stratified the sample into those who refused to provide a WTP, those willing to pay $US0, and those willing to pay > $US0. We used a two-part model, controlling for demographic characteristics, to predict adjusted mean WTP and to examine associations between WTP, clinical features (cognition, function, behavioral symptoms), and time spent assisting PwD with daily activities. First, we used logistic regression to model the probability a caregiver was willing to pay > $US0. Second, we used a generalized linear model (log link and Gamma distribution) to estimate the amount caregivers were willing to pay conditional on WTP > $US0. RESULTS: Of 250 dyads enrolled, 226 (90%) had complete data and were included in our analyses. Of 226 dyads, 26 (11%) refused to provide a WTP value, 72 (32%) were willing to pay $US0, and 128 (57%) were willing to pay > $US0. In the combined model, mean adjusted WTP was $US36.00 (95% confidence interval [CI] 26.72-45.27) per session. Clinical features were not significantly associated with WTP. One additional hour providing PwD assistance was associated with a $US1.64 (95% CI 0.23-3.04) increase in WTP per session. CONCLUSION: As caregivers spend more time assisting with daily activities, they are willing to pay more for a supportive program. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01892579.

Unmet needs in community-living persons with dementia are common, often non-medical and related to patient and caregiver characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: Understanding which characteristics of persons with dementia (PWD) and their caregivers are associated with unmet needs can inform strategies to address those needs. Our purpose was to determine the percentage of PWD having unmet needs and significant correlates of unmet needs in PWD. DESIGN: Cross-sectional data were analyzed using bivariate and hierarchical multiple linear regression analyses. SETTING: Participants lived in the greater Baltimore, Maryland and Washington DC suburban area. PARTICIPANTS: A sample of 646 community-living PWD and their informal caregivers participated in an in-home assessment of dementia-related needs. MEASUREMENTS: Unmet needs were identified using the Johns Hopkins Dementia Care Needs Assessment. Correlates of unmet needs were determined using demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, functional and quality of life characteristics of the PWD and their caregivers. RESULTS: PWD had a mean of 10.6 (±4.8) unmet needs out of 43 items (24.8%). Unmet needs were most common in Home/Personal Safety (97.4%), General Health Care (83.1%), and Daily Activities (73.2%) domains. Higher unmet needs were significantly related to non-white race, lower education, higher cognitive function, more neuropsychiatric symptoms, lower quality of life in PWD, and having caregivers with lower education or who spent fewer hours/week with the PWD. CONCLUSIONS: Unmet needs are common in community-living PWD, and most are non-medical. Home-based dementia care can identify and address PWD's unmet needs by focusing on care recipients and caregivers to enable PWD to remain safely at home.

MIND at Home-Streamlined: Study protocol for a randomized trial of home-based care coordination for persons with dementia and their caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is associated with high health care costs, premature long-term care (LTC) placement, medical complications, reduced quality of life, and caregiver burden. Most health care providers and systems are not yet organized or equipped to provide comprehensive long-term care management for dementia, although a range of effective symptoms and supportive care approaches exist. The Maximizing Independence at Home-Streamlined (MIND-S) is a promising model of home-based dementia care coordination designed to efficiently improve person-centered outcomes, while reducing care costs. This report describes the rationale and design of an NIA-funded randomized controlled trial to test the impact of MIND-S on time to LTC placement, person with dementia outcomes (unmet needs, behavior, quality of life), family caregiver outcomes (unmet needs, burden), and cost offset at 18 (primary end point) and 24 months, compared to an augmented usual care group. METHODS: This is a 24-month, parallel group, randomized trial evaluating MIND-S in a cohort of 304 community-living persons with dementia and their family caregivers in Maryland. MIND-S dyads receive 18 months of care coordination by an interdisciplinary team comprised of trained non-clinical community workers (e.g. Memory Care Coordinators), a registered nurse, and a geriatric psychiatrist. Intervention components include in-home dementia-related needs assessments; individualized care planning; implementation of standardized evidence-based care strategy protocols; and ongoing monitoring and reassessment. Outcomes are assessed by blinded evaluators at baseline, 4.5, 9, 13.5, 18, and 24 months. DISCUSSION: Trial results will provide rigorous data to inform innovations in effective system-level approaches to dementia care.

Home is where the future is: The BrightFocus Foundation consensus panel on dementia care.

INTRODUCTION: A national consensus panel was convened to develop recommendations on future directions for home-based dementia care (HBDC). METHODS: The panel summarized advantages and challenges of shifting to HBDC as the nexus of care and developed consensus-based recommendations. RESULTS: The panel developed five core recommendations: (1) HBDC should be considered the nexus of new dementia models, from diagnosis to end of life in dementia; (2) new payment models are needed to support HBDC and reward integration of care; (3) a diverse new workforce that spans the care continuum should be prepared urgently; (4) new technologies to promote communication, monitoring/safety, and symptoms management must be tested, integrated, and deployed; and (5) targeted dissemination efforts for HBDC must be employed. DISCUSSION: HBDC represents a promising paradigm shift to improve care for those living with dementia and their family caregivers: these recommendations provide a framework to chart a course forward for HBDC.

Health Services Utilization in Older Adults with Dementia Receiving Care Coordination: The MIND at Home Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate effects of a novel dementia care coordination program on health services utilization. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: A total of 303 community-dwelling adults aged ≥70 with a cognitive disorder in Baltimore, Maryland (2008-2011). STUDY DESIGN: Single-blind RCT evaluating efficacy of an 18-month care coordination intervention delivered through community-based nonclinical care coordinators, supported by an interdisciplinary clinical team. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Study partners reported acute care/inpatient, outpatient, and home- and community-based service utilization at baseline, 9, and 18 months. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: From baseline to 18 months, there were no significant group differences in acute care/inpatient or total outpatient services use, although intervention participants had significantly increased outpatient dementia/mental health visits from 9 to 18 months (p = .04) relative to controls. Home and community-based support service use significantly increased from baseline to 18 months in the intervention compared to control (p = .005). CONCLUSIONS: While this dementia care coordination program did not impact acute care/inpatient services utilization, it increased use of dementia-related outpatient medical care and nonmedical supportive community services, a combination that may have helped participants remain at home longer. Future care model modifications that emphasize delirium, falls prevention, and behavior management may be needed to influence inpatient service use.

Potentially Unsafe Activities and Living Conditions of Older Adults with Dementia.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the prevalence of dementia in the absence of a reported dementia diagnosis and whether potentially unsafe activities and living conditions vary as a function of dementia diagnosis status in a nationally representative sample of older adults. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older enrolled in the National Health and Aging Trends Study (N = 7,609). MEASUREMENTS: Participants were classified into four groups based on self-report of dementia diagnosis, proxy screening interview, and cognitive testing: probable dementia with reported dementia diagnosis (n = 457), probable dementia without reported dementia diagnosis (n = 581), possible dementia (n = 996), or no dementia (n = 5,575). Potentially unsafe activities (driving, preparing hot meals, managing finances or medications, attending doctor visits alone) and living conditions (falls, living alone, and unmet needs) were examined according to dementia status subgroups in stratified analyses and multivariate models, adjusting for sociodemographic factors, medical comorbidities, and physical capacity. RESULTS: The prevalence of driving (22.9%), preparing hot meals (31.0%), managing finances (21.9%), managing medications (36.6%), and attending doctor visits alone (20.6%) was lowest in persons with probable dementia; however, but in persons with probable dementia, the covariate-adjusted rates of driving, preparing hot meals, managing finances, managing medications, and attending doctor visits alone were significantly higher in those without reported dementia diagnosis than in those with reported diagnosis (all odds ratios ≥2.00, all P < .01). CONCLUSION: Older adults with probable dementia who are not aware of a dementia diagnosis are more likely to report engaging in potentially unsafe behaviors. Understanding the prevalence of potentially unsafe activities and living conditions can help clinicians focus safety screening and counseling in older adults with diagnosed or suspected dementia.

Innovative care models for high-cost Medicare beneficiaries: delivery system and payment reform to accelerate adoption.

OBJECTIVES: About a third of Medicare beneficiaries are covered by Medicare Advantage (MA) plans or accountable care organizations (ACOs). As a result of assuming financial risk for Medicare services and/or being eligible for shared savings, these organizations have an incentive to adopt models of delivering care that contribute to better care, improved health outcomes, and lower cost. This paper identifies innovative care models across the care continuum for high-cost Medicare beneficiaries that MA plans and ACOs could adopt to improve care while potentially achieving savings. It suggests policy changes that would accelerate testing and spread of promising care delivery model innovations. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Targeted review of the literature to identify care delivery models focused on high-cost or high-risk Medicare beneficiaries. RESULTS: This paper presents select delivery models for high-risk Medicare beneficiaries across the care continuum that show promise of yielding better care at lower cost that could be considered for adoption by MA plans and ACOs. Common to these models are elements of the Wagner Chronic Care Model, including practice redesign to incorporate a team approach to care, the inclusion of nonmedical personnel, efforts to promote patient engagement, supporting provider education on innovations,and information systems allowing feedback of information to providers. The goal of these models is to slow the progression to long-term care, reduce health risks, and minimize adverse health impacts, all while achieving savings.These models attempt to maintain the ability of high-risk individuals to live in the home or a community-based setting, thereby avoiding costly institutional care. Identifying and implementing promising care delivery models will become increasingly important in launching successful population health initiatives. CONCLUSIONS: MA plans and ACOs stand to benefit financially from adopting care delivery models for high-risk Medicare beneficiaries that reduce hospitalization. Spreading these models to other organizations will require provider payment policy changes. Integration of acute and long-term care would further spur adoption of effective strategies for reducing or delaying entry into long-term institutional care.

A randomized controlled trial of a community-based dementia care coordination intervention: effects of MIND at Home on caregiver outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether MIND at Home, a community-based, multicomponent, care coordination intervention, reduces unmet caregiving needs and burden in informal caregivers of persons with memory disorders. METHODS: An 18-month randomized controlled trial of 289 community-living care recipient (CR)-caregiver (informal caregivers, i.e., unpaid individuals who regularly assisted the CR) dyads from 28 postal code areas of Baltimore, Maryland was conducted. All dyads and the CR's primary care physician received the written needs assessment results and intervention recommendations. Intervention dyads then received an 18-month care coordination intervention delivered by nonclinical community workers to address unmet care needs through individualized care planning, referral and linkage to dementia services, provision of caregiver dementia education and skill-building strategies, and care progress monitoring by an interdisciplinary team. Primary outcome was total percent of unmet caregiver needs at 18 months. Secondary outcomes included objective and subjective caregiver burden measures, quality of life (QOL), and depression. RESULTS: Total percent of unmet caregiver needs declined in both groups from baseline to 18 months, with no statistically significant between-group difference. No significant group differences occurred in most caregiver burden measures, depression, or QOL. There was a potentially clinically relevant reduction in self-reported number of hours caregivers spent with the CR for MIND participants compared with control subjects. CONCLUSION: No statistically significant impacts on caregiver outcomes were found after multiple comparison adjustments. However, MIND at Home appeared to have had a modest and clinically meaningful impact on informal caregiver time spent with CRs.

Correlates of objective and subjective measures of caregiver burden among dementia caregivers: influence of unmet patient and caregiver dementia-related care needs.

BACKGROUND: This study examines the relationship of unmet dementia-related care needs of community-dwelling persons, and their caregivers (CGs), to measures of caregiver burden. METHODS: Cross-sectional baseline data were analyzed from participants in a dementia care coordination trial of community-residing persons with dementia (PWD) (n = 254) and their caregivers (n = 246). Participants were recruited from Northwest Baltimore, Maryland. The Zarit Burden Inventory (ZBI) was used to measure subjective caregiver burden. Objective burden was measured by estimating the total hours per week spent doing things for the PWD and/or how many hours CGs missed paid work in the prior month due to caregiving responsibilities. The Johns Hopkins Dementia Care Needs Assessment was used to identify unmet dementia-related care needs. Bivariate and multivariate linear regressions examined the relationship of unmet needs, demographic, clinical, or functional characteristics with caregiver burden measures. RESULTS: In adjusted multivariable models, patient neuropsychiatric symptoms and caregiver unmet emotional needs explained 22% of the variance in ZBI scores. In adjusted multivariable models, caregiver need for respite, patient functional dependency, and caregiver unmet specialty medical needs explained 26% of the variance in the hours per week spent caregiving. PWD's level of functional dependency was the sole correlate of missed time at work, explaining 11% of the variance. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing potentially modifiable unmet caregiver needs may reduce subjective and objective caregiver burden.

The impact of complex chronic diseases on care utilization among assisted living residents.

PURPOSE: Many residents of assisted living (AL) have chronic diseases that are difficult to manage, including congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and diabetes mellitus (DM). We estimated the amount and intensity of care delivered by the staff for residents with these conditions. METHODS: We performed a secondary data analysis from the Maryland Assisted Living (MDAL) Study (399 residents, 29 facilities). In-person assessments included measures of cognition, function, depression, and general medical health. Diagnosis of CHF, COPD, and DM, as well as current medications was abstracted from AL medical charts. Measures of care utilization were operationalized at the resident level as: 1) minutes per day of direct care (caregiver activity scale [CAS]), 2) subjective staff ratings of care burden, and 3) assigned AL "level of care" (based on state regulatory criteria). RESULTS: In best fit regression models, CHF and DM were not significant predictors of the evaluated care utilization measures; however, COPD was independently associated with increased minutes per day of direct care - 34% of the variance in the caregiver activity scale was explained by degree of functional dependency, cognitive impairment, age, and presence of COPD. Functional dependency, depressive symptoms, and age explained almost a quarter (23%) of the variance of staff care burden rating. For the AL level of care intensity rating, degree of functional dependency, level of cognition, and age were significant correlates, together explaining about 28% of the variance. CONCLUSION: The presence of COPD was a significant predictor of time per day of direct care. However, CHF and DM were not correlates of care utilization measures. Functional and cognitive impairment was associated with measures of care utilization, reiterating the importance of these characteristics in the utilization and intensity of care consumed by AL residents. Further study of this population could reveal other forms and amounts of care utilization.

Cohort differences in dementia recognition and treatment indicators among assisted living residents in Maryland: did a change in the resident assessment tool make a difference?

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of empirical evidence about the impact of regulations on dementia care quality in assisted living (AL). We examined cohort differences in dementia recognition and treatment indicators between two cohorts of AL residents with dementia, evaluated prior to and following a dementia-related policy modification to more adequately assess memory and behavioral problems. METHODS: Cross-sectional comparison of two AL resident cohorts was done (Cohort 1 [evaluated 2001-2003] and Cohort 2 [evaluated 2004-2006]) from the Maryland Assisted Living studies. Initial in-person evaluations of residents with dementia (n = 248) were performed from a random sample of 28 AL facilities in Maryland (physician examination, clinical characteristics, and staff and family recognition of dementia included). Adequacy of dementia workup and treatment was rated by an expert consensus panel. RESULTS: Staff recognition of dementia was better in Cohort 1 than in Cohort 2 (77% vs. 63%, p = 0.011), with no significant differences in family recognition (86% vs. 85%, p = 0.680), or complete treatment ratings (52% vs. 64%, p = 0.060). In adjusted logistic regression, cognitive impairment and neuropsychiatric symptoms correlated with staff recognition; and cognitive impairment correlated with family recognition. Increased age and cognitive impairment reduced odds of having a complete dementia workup. Odds of having complete dementia treatment was reduced by age and having more depressive symptoms. Cohort was not predictive of dementia recognition or treatment indicators in adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: We noted few cohort differences in dementia care indicators after accounting for covariates, and concluded that rates of dementia recognition and treatment did not appear to change much organically following the policy modifications.

Unmet needs of community-residing persons with dementia and their informal caregivers: findings from the maximizing independence at home study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and correlates of unmet needs in a sample of community-residing persons with dementia (PWD) and their informal caregivers. DESIGN: Analysis of cross-sectional, baseline participant characteristics before randomization in a care coordination intervention trial. SETTING: Baltimore, Maryland. PARTICIPANTS: Community-residing PWD (n=254) and their informal caregivers (n=246). MEASUREMENTS: In-home assessments of dementia-related needs based on the Johns Hopkins Dementia Care Needs Assessment. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were conducted to identify demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, functional, and quality-of-life correlates of unmet needs. RESULTS: The mean number of unmet needs was 7.7±4.8 in PWD and 4.6±2.3 in caregivers, with almost all PWD (99%) and caregivers (97%) having one or more unmet needs. Unmet needs in PWD were significantly greater in those with higher cognitive function. Ninety percent of PWD had unmet safety needs, more than half had unmet needs for meaningful activities, and almost one-third had not received a prior evaluation or diagnosis. Higher unmet needs in PWD was significantly associated with nonwhite race, lower income, less impairment in activities of daily living, and more symptoms of depression. For caregivers, more than 85% had unmet needs for resource referrals and caregiver education. Higher unmet caregiver needs was significantly associated with nonwhite race, less education, and more symptoms of depression. CONCLUSION: Many community-residing PWD and their caregivers have unmet dementia-related needs for care, services, and support. Providers should be aware that unmet needs may be higher in minority and low-income community residents, caregivers with lower education, and individuals with early-stage dementia. Identifying and treating symptoms of depression in PWD and caregivers may enable them to address their other unmet needs.