Differences in Assessment of Everyday Preferences Between People With Cognitive Impairment and Their Care Partners: The Role of Neuropsychiatric Symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: As cognitive impairment progresses, people with dementia increasingly rely on surrogate decision-makers for everyday activities. Yet, little is known about concordance on everyday preferences between persons with cognitive impairment and their care partners. METHODS: The sample included 69 dyads of persons with cognitive impairment (Clinical Dementia Rating Scale ≥0.5) and their care partners. We used the Preferences for Everyday Living Inventory (PELI) to assess preferences for activities and lifestyle choices among persons with cognitive impairment. The PELI was concurrently but separately administered to care partners, who answered as surrogate decision-makers. Factor analysis was used to ascertain factor structure of the PELI; reliability measures were computed within the sample. Paired sample t-tests were used to estimate differences in scores of corresponding PELI items for each factor. Multiple regression models were used to relate predictors, including neuropsychiatric symptoms, to agreement levels. RESULTS: Four factors were identified from the PELI: autonomous choice, social engagement, personal growth, and keeping a routine. Significant participant-care partner discrepancy was found in "social engagement" preferences (e.g., regular contact with family, meeting new people, volunteering). Geriatric Depression Scale-15 score and care partner sex were significantly associated with participant-care partner discrepancies in "social engagement" preferences. CONCLUSION: This study yields new insights regarding the most important preferences for persons with cognitive impairment and clarifies a path to optimizing surrogate decision-making around everyday preferences by highlighting areas of apparent disagreement and identifying potential predictors of discrepancy.

Physician-Assisted Death Psychiatric Assessment: A Standardized Protocol to Conform to the California End of Life Option Act.

BACKGROUND: The California End of Life Option Act (EOLOA), which legalized physician-assisted death (PAD), became effective in 2016. The EOLOA does not require a mental health consultation in all cases nor does it state the standards for the mental health assessment. University of California, San Francisco Medical Center (UCSFMC) policy makers decided to require a mental health assessment of all patients seeking PAD under the EOLOA. OBJECTIVES: The Department of Psychiatry was tasked with developing a standard protocol for the mental health assessment of patients seeking PAD. METHODS: Members of the consultation-liaison (C-L) service developed a document to guide members in completing the mental health evaluations for patients requesting PAD. RESULTS: A committee at UCSFMC developed a clinical protocol informed by the law with an additional local expectation of an evaluation by a psychiatrist or clinical psychologist. The C-L psychiatry group at UCSF developed a standard protocol for the psychiatric assessment for use by clinicians performing these assessments. Attention to the cognitive, mood, and decisional capacity status pertinent to choosing PAD is required under the clinical guidance document. Case vignettes of 6 patients evaluated for PAD are presented. CONCLUSIONS: The local adoption of the California EOLOA by UCSFMC requires a mental health assessment of all patients requesting EOL services at UCSF. The clinical guideline for these assessments was locally developed, informed by the literature on EOL in other jurisdictions where it has already been available.