Costs of Care of Agitation Associated With Dementia in 8 European Countries: Results From the RightTimePlaceCare Study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the additional societal costs for people living with dementia (PwD) with agitation in home care (HC) and institutional long-term care (ILTC) settings in 8 European countries. DESIGN: Cross-sectional data from the RightTimePlaceCare cohort. SETTING: HC and ILTC settings from 8 European countries (Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and England). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1997 PwD (1217 in HC group and 780 lived in an ILTC) and their caregivers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Medical care, community care, and informal care were recorded using the Resource Utilization in Dementia (RUD) questionnaire. Agitation was assessed based on the agitation symptoms cluster defined by the presence of agitation and/or irritability and/or disinhibition and/or aberrant motor behavior items of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q). RESULTS: Total monthly mean cost differences due to agitation were 445€ in the HC setting and 561€ in the ILTC setting (P = .01 and .02, respectively). Informal care costs were the main driver in the HC group (73% of total costs) and institutional care costs were the main driver in the ILTC group (53% of total costs). After adjustments, the log link generalized linear mixed model showed an association between agitation symptoms and an increase of informal care costs by 17% per month in HC setting (P < .05). CONCLUSION: This study found that agitation symptoms have a substantial impact on informal care costs in the community care setting. Future research is needed to evaluate which strategies may be efficient by improving the cost-effectiveness ratio and reducing the burden associated with informal care in the management of agitation in PwD.

Caring for a Person With Dementia on the Margins of Long-Term Care: A Perspective on Burden From 8 European Countries.

OBJECTIVES: To explore associations between carer burden and characteristics of (1) the informal carer, (2) the person with dementia, and (3) the care support network in 8 European countries. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: People with dementia judged at risk of admission to long-term care (LTC) facilities in 8 European countries (Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1223 people with dementia supported by community services at home or receiving day care or respite care and their informal carers. MEASUREMENTS: Variables regarding the informal carer included familial relationship and living situation. Variables relating to the person with dementia included cognitive functioning (S-MMSE), neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI-Q), depressive symptoms (Cornell depression scale), comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index), and physical functioning (Katz Activity of Daily Living [ADL] Index). The care support network was measured using hours of caregiving (ADLs, instrumental ADLs [IADLs], supervision), additional informal care support, and service receipt (home care, day care). Experience of carer burden was recorded using the Zarit Burden Interview. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine factors associated with high carer burden. RESULTS: Carer burden was highest in Estonia (mean 39.7/88) and lowest in the Netherlands (mean 26.5/88). High burden was significantly associated with characteristics of the informal carer (family relationship, specifically wives or daughters), of the person with dementia (physical dependency in ADLs; neuropsychiatric symptoms, in particular nighttime behaviors and irritability), the care support network (hours of caregiving supervision; receipt of other informal care support) and country of residence. CONCLUSION: A range of factors are associated with burden in informal carers of people with dementia judged to be on the margins of LTC. Support for informal carers needs to take account of gender differences. The dual challenges of distressed behaviors and difficulties in ADLs by the person with dementia may be addressed by specific nonpharmacological interventions focusing on both elements. The potential protective effect of additional informal support to carers highlights the importance of peer support or better targeted home support services. The implementation of appropriate and tailored interventions to reduce burden by supporting informal carers may enable people with dementia to remain at home for longer.

Reasons for institutionalization of people with dementia: informal caregiver reports from 8 European countries.

OBJECTIVES: To explore reasons for institutionalization of people with dementia according to informal caregivers as well as variation in reasons between countries. DESIGN: An explorative cross-sectional study was conducted in 8 European countries. SETTING: Per country, a minimum of 3 long term care facilities, offering care and accommodation as a package, participated in this study. Participating countries were selected to represent different geographic areas in Europe. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 791 informal caregivers involved in the RightTimePlaceCare project of people with dementia who were recently admitted to a long term care facility, 786 were included for this study. MEASUREMENTS: As part of a semistructured interview, informal caregivers were asked the main reason for institutionalization in an open-ended question. Answers were categorized according to a conventional coding approach. All reasons were then quantified and tested. RESULTS: Mainly patient-related reasons were stated, such as neuropsychiatric symptoms (25%), care dependency (24%), and cognition (19%). Neuropsychiatric symptoms were among the most often mentioned reasons in most countries. Besides patient-related reasons, caregiver burden and the inability of the informal caregiver to care for the patient were stated as reasons (both 15%). Further analyses showed countries differ significantly in reasons according to informal caregivers. Additionally, reasons were analyzed for spouses and child-caregivers, showing that spouses more often stated reasons related to themselves compared with child-caregivers. CONCLUSION: Multiple reasons contribute to the institutionalization for people with dementia, with several factors that may influence why there were country differences. Variation in the organization of dementia care and cultural aspects, or the relationship between the informal caregiver and person with dementia may be factors influencing the reasons. Because of a wide variation in reasons between countries, no one-size-fits-all approach can be offered to guide informal caregivers when facing the possibility of institutionalization of the person with dementia.