Protocol for the feasibility and implementation study of a model of best practice in primary care led postdiagnostic dementia care: PriDem.

INTRODUCTION: Care is often inadequate and poorly integrated after a dementia diagnosis. Research and policy highlight the unaffordability and unsustainability of specialist-led support, and instead suggest a task-shared model, led by primary care. This study is part of the PriDem primary care led postdiagnostic dementia care research programme and will assess delivery of an evidence-informed, primary care based, person-centred intervention. The intervention involves Clinical Dementia Leads (CDLs) working in primary care to develop effective dementia care systems that build workforce capacity and support teams to deliver tailored support to people living with dementia and their carers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a 15-month mixed-methods feasibility and implementation study, situated in four National Health Service (NHS) primary care networks in England. The primary outcome is adoption of personalised care planning by participating general practices, assessed through a patient records audit. Feasibility outcomes include recruitment and retention; appropriateness and acceptability of outcome measures; acceptability, feasibility and fidelity of intervention components. People living with dementia (n=80) and carers (n=66) will be recruited through participating general practices and will complete standardised measures of health and well-being. Participant service use data will be extracted from electronic medical records. A process evaluation will explore implementation barriers and facilitators through methods including semistructured interviews with people living with dementia, carers and professionals; observation of CDL engagement with practice staff; and a practice fidelity log. Process evaluation data will be analysed qualitatively using codebook thematic analysis, and quantitatively using descriptive statistics. Economic analysis will determine intervention cost-effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received favourable ethical opinion from Wales REC4. NHS Confidentiality Advisory Group support allows researchers preconsent access to patient data. Results will inform intervention adaptations and a future large-scale evaluation. Dissemination through peer-review journals, engagement with policy-makers and conferences will inform recommendations for dementia services commissioning. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11677384.

Cost-effectiveness of topical pharmacological, oral pharmacological, physical and combined treatments for acne vulgaris.

BACKGROUND: Acne vulgaris is a common skin condition that may cause psychosocial distress. There is evidence that topical treatment combinations, chemical peels and photochemical therapy (combined blue/red light) are effective for mild-to-moderate acne, while topical treatment combinations, oral antibiotics combined with topical treatments, oral isotretinoin and photodynamic therapy are most effective for moderate-to-severe acne. Effective treatments have varying costs. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England considers cost-effectiveness when producing national clinical, public health and social care guidance. AIM: To assess the cost-effectiveness of treatments for mild-to-moderate and moderate-to-severe acne to inform relevant NICE guidance. METHODS: A decision-analytical model compared costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of effective topical pharmacological, oral pharmacological, physical and combined treatments for mild-to-moderate and moderate-to-severe acne, from the perspective of the National Health Service in England. Effectiveness data were derived from a network meta-analysis. Other model input parameters were based on published sources, supplemented by expert opinion. RESULTS: All of the assessed treatments were more cost-effective than treatment with placebo (general practitioner visits without active treatment). For mild-to-moderate acne, topical treatment combinations and photochemical therapy (combined blue/red light) were most cost-effective. For moderate-to-severe acne, topical treatment combinations, oral antibiotics combined with topical treatments, and oral isotretinoin were the most cost-effective. Results showed uncertainty, as reflected in the wide confidence intervals around mean treatment rankings. CONCLUSION: A range of treatments are cost-effective for the management of acne. Well-conducted studies are needed to examine the long-term clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the full range of acne treatments.

Implementing post diagnostic dementia care in primary care: a mixed-methods systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Concentrating post-diagnostic dementia care in primary care may lead to better and more cost-effective care closer to home. We aimed to assess which intervention components and contextual factors may contribute to the successful delivery and implementation of primary care-led post-diagnostic dementia care. METHODS: Mixed-methods systematic review. We searched five databases (inception-March 2019) with reference list screening and citation tracking. We included studies evaluating post-diagnostic dementia care interventions where primary care had a significant role in dementia care, which assessed one or more implementation elements (acceptability, feasibility, adoption, sustainability, reach, costs, appropriateness or fidelity). Two authors independently critically appraised studies. RESULTS: Out of 4528 unique references, we screened 380 full texts and included 49 evaluations of services collecting implementation process data. Most services had high acceptability ratings. The most acceptable components were information provision, social and emotional support and links to community organisations. Feasibility was chiefly influenced by provider engagement and leadership, building dementia care capacity, sufficient resources/funding and collaboration. Care quality was maximised through adding capacity from a dementia-specific health professional. On the basis of limited data, costs for various primary care-led models did not substantially differ from each other. CONCLUSION: A range of primary care-led dementia care models appear feasible and acceptable. Future services should: add dementia-focussed health professionals into primary care, develop primary care leadership and provide sufficient funding and collaboration opportunities. Information, community service links and social and ongoing support should be part of services. Further exploration of service reach and formalised fidelity assessment are needed.

What works in managing complex conditions in older people in primary and community care? A state-of-the-art review.

The number of older people living with complex health conditions is increasing, with the majority of these managed in primary and community settings. Many models of care have been developed to support them, however, there is mixed evidence on their value and they include multiple overlapping components. We aimed to synthesise the evidence to learn what works for managing complex conditions in older people in primary and community care. We carried out a state-of-the-art review of systematic reviews. We searched three databases (January 2009 to July 2019) for models of primary and community care for long-term conditions, frailty, multimorbidity and complex neurological conditions common to older people such as dementia. We narratively synthesised review findings to summarise the evidence for each model type and identify components which influenced effectiveness. Out of 2,129 unique titles and abstracts, 178 full texts were reviewed and 54 systematic reviews were included. We found that the models of care were more likely to improve depressive symptoms and mental health outcomes than physical health or service use outcomes. Interventions including self-management, patient education, assessment with follow-up care procedures, and structured care processes or pathways had greater evidence of effectiveness. The level of healthcare service integration appeared to be more important than inclusion of specific professional types within a team. However, more experienced and qualified nurses were associated with better outcomes. These conclusions are limited by the overlap between reviews, reliance on vote counting within some included reviews and the quality of study reports. In conclusion, primary and community care interventions for complex conditions in older people should include: (a) clear intervention targets; (b) explicit theoretical underpinnings; and (c) elements of self-management and patient education, structured collaboration between healthcare professionals and professional support. Further work needs to determine the optimal intensity, length, team composition and role of technology in interventions.

Effectiveness of different post-diagnostic dementia care models delivered by primary care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Global policy recommendations suggest a task-shifted model of post-diagnostic dementia care, moving towards primary and community-based care. It is unclear how this may best be delivered. AIM: To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of primary care-based models of post-diagnostic dementia care. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review of trials and economic evaluations of post-diagnostic dementia care interventions where primary care was substantially involved in care plan decision making. METHOD: Searches were undertaken of MEDLINE, PsychINFO, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL (from inception to March 2019). Two authors independently critically appraised studies and inductively classified interventions into types of care models. Random effects meta-analysis or narrative synthesis was conducted for each model where appropriate. RESULTS: From 4506 unique references and 357 full texts, 23 papers were included from 10 trials of nine interventions, delivered in four countries. Four types of care models were identified. Primary care provider (PCP)-led care (n = 1) led to better caregiver mental health and reduced hospital and memory clinic costs compared with memory clinics. PCP-led care with specialist consulting support (n = 2) did not have additional effects on clinical outcomes or costs over usual primary care. PCP-case management partnership models (n = 6) offered the most promise, with impact on neuropsychiatric symptoms, caregiver burden, distress and mastery, and healthcare costs. Integrated primary care memory clinics (n = 1) had limited evidence for improved quality of life and cost-effectiveness compared with memory clinics. CONCLUSION: Partnership models may impact on some clinical outcomes and healthcare costs. More rigorous evaluation of promising primary care-led care models is needed.

MEDREV (pharmacy-health psychology intervention in people living with dementia with behaviour that challenges): the feasibility of measuring clinical outcomes and costs of the intervention.

BACKGROUND: People living with dementia in care homes frequently exhibit "behaviour that challenges". Anti-psychotics are used to treat such behaviour, but are associated with significant morbidity. This study researched the feasibility of conducting a trial of a full clinical medication review for care home residents with behaviour that challenges, combined with staff training. This paper focusses on the feasibility of measuring clinical outcomes and intervention costs. METHODS: People living with moderate to severe dementia, receiving psychotropics for behaviour that challenges, in care homes were recruited for a medication review by a specialist pharmacist. Care home and primary care staff received training on the management of challenging behaviour. Data were collected at 8 weeks, and 3 and 6 months. Measures were Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home version (NPI-NH), cognition (sMMSE), quality of life (EQ-5D-5 L/DEMQoL) and costs (Client Services Receipt Inventory). Response rates, for clinical, quality of life and health economic measures, including the levels of resource-use associated with the medication review and other non-intervention costs were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-nine of 34 participants recruited received a medication review. It was feasible to measure the effects of the complex intervention on the management of behaviour that challenges with the NPI-NH. There was valid NPI-NH data at each time point (response rate = 100%). The sMMSE response rate was 18.2%. Levels of resource-use associated with the medication review were estimated for all 29 participants who received a medication review. Good response levels were achieved for other non-intervention costs (100% completion rate), and the EQ-5D-5 L and DEMQoL (≥88% at each of the time points where data was collected). CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to measure the clinical and cost effectiveness of a complex intervention for behaviour that challenges using the NPI-NH and quality of life measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN58330068. Retrospectively registered, 15 October 2017.

Case Management for People with Dementia and its Translations: A Discussion Paper.

Case management is generally seen as a way to provide efficient, cost-saving person-centred care for people with dementia by connecting together fragmented services, but the available evidence in favour of its merits is often considered inconclusive, unclear and sketchy. This discussion paper investigates the evidence of the benefit of case management for people with dementia and explores the complexity of the concept and the experiences of its implementation. It offers a comprehensive framework for conceptualising various types of case management and asks the question: who can be a case manager? Building on examples from three European countries it addresses the problem of the expansion and adoption of the case management method. It compares the conventional model of diffusion of innovation with the ideas of interessement and co-constitution and envisions a successful model of case management as a fluid technology that is both friendly and flexible, allowing it to adapt to different settings and systems.

Improving the management of behaviour that challenges associated with dementia in care homes: protocol for pharmacy-health psychology intervention feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: The inappropriate use of antipsychotics in people with dementia for behaviour that challenges is associated with an estimated 1800 deaths annually. However, solely focusing on antipsychotics may transfer prescribing to other equally dangerous psychotropics. Little is known about the role of pharmacists in the management of psychotropics used to treat behaviours that challenge. This research aims to determine whether it is feasible to implement and measure the effectiveness of a combined pharmacy-health psychology intervention incorporating a medication review and staff training package to limit the prescription of psychotropics to manage behaviour that challenges in care home residents with dementia. METHODS/ANALYSIS: 6 care homes within the West Midlands will be recruited. People with dementia receiving medication for behaviour that challenges, or their personal consultee, will be approached regarding participation. Medication used to treat behaviour that challenges will be reviewed by the pharmacist, in collaboration with the general practitioner (GP), person with dementia and carer. The behavioural intervention consists of a training package for care home staff and GPs promoting person-centred care and treating behaviours that challenge as an expression of unmet need. The primary outcome measure is the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home version (NPI-NH). Other outcomes include quality of life (EQ-5D and DEMQoL), cognition (sMMSE), health economic (CSRI) and prescribed medication including whether recommendations were implemented. Outcome data will be collected at 6 weeks, and 3 and 6 months. Pretraining and post-training interviews will explore stakeholders' expectations and experiences of the intervention. Data will be used to estimate the sample size for a definitive study. ETHICS/DISSEMINATION: The project has received a favourable opinion from the East Midlands REC (15/EM/3014). If potential participants lack capacity, a personal consultee will be consulted regarding participation in line with the Mental Capacity Act. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences.

General practitioners' knowledge, confidence and attitudes in the diagnosis and management of dementia.

OBJECTIVE: To measure general practitioners' knowledge of, confidence with and attitudes to the diagnosis and management of dementia in primary care. SETTING: 20 general practices of varying size and prior research experience in Central Scotland, and 16 similarly varied practices in north London. PARTICIPANTS: 127 general practitioners who had volunteered to join a randomised controlled trial of educational interventions about dementia diagnosis and management. METHODS: Self-completion questionnaires covering knowledge, confidence and attitudes were retrieved from practitioners prior to the educational interventions. RESULTS: General practitioners' knowledge of dementia diagnosis and management is good, but poor awareness of its epidemiology leads to an over-estimate of caseload. Knowledge of local diagnostic and support services is less good, and one third of general practitioners expressed limited confidence in their diagnostic skills, whilst two-thirds lacked confidence in management of behaviour and other problems in dementia. The main difficulties identified by general practitioners were talking with patients about the diagnosis, responding to behaviour problems and coordinating support services. General practitioners perceived lack of time and lack of social services support as the major obstacles to good quality care more often than they identified their own unfamiliarity with current management or with local resources. Attitudes to the disclosure of the diagnosis, and to the potential for improving the quality of life of patients and carers varied, but a third of general practitioners believed that dementia care is within a specialist's domain, not that of general practice. More experienced and male general practitioners were more pessimistic about dementia care, as were general practitioners with lower knowledge about dementia. Those reporting greater difficulty with dementia diagnosis and management and those with lower knowledge scores were also less likely to express attitudes endorsing open communication with patient and carer. CONCLUSION: Educational support for general practitioners should concentrate on epidemiological knowledge, disclosure of the diagnosis and management of behaviour problems in dementia. The availability and profile of support services, particularly social care, need to be enhanced, if earlier diagnosis is to be pursued as a policy objective in primary care.