Feasibility of Remote Administration of the Uniform Data Set-Version 3 for Assessment of Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's Disease.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the feasibility and concurrent validity of a modified Uniform Data Set version 3 (UDSv3) for remote administration for individuals with normal cognition (NC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and early dementia. METHOD: Participants (N = 93) (age: 72.8 [8.9] years; education: 15.6 [2.5] years; 72% female; 84% White) were enrolled from the Wake Forest ADRC. Portions of the UDSv3 cognitive battery, plus the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, were completed by telephone or video within ~6 months of participant's in-person visit. Adaptations for phone administration (e.g., Oral Trails for Trail Making Test [TMT] and Blind Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MoCA] for MoCA) were made. Participants reported on the pleasantness, difficulty, and preference for each modality. Staff provided validity ratings for assessments. Participants' remote data were adjudicated by cognitive experts blinded to the in person-diagnosis (NC [N = 44], MCI [N = 35], Dementia [N = 11], or other [N = 3]). RESULTS: Remote assessments were rated as pleasant as in-person assessments by 74% of participants and equally difficult by 75%. Staff validity rating (video = 92%; phone = 87.5%) was good. Concordance between remote/in-person scores was generally moderate to good (r = .3 -.8; p < .05) except for TMT-A/OTMT-A (r = .3; p > .05). Agreement between remote/in-person adjudicated cognitive status was good (k = .61-.64). CONCLUSIONS: We found preliminary evidence that older adults, including those with cognitive impairment, can be assessed remotely using a modified UDSv3 research battery. Adjudication of cognitive status that relies on remotely collected data is comparable to classifications using in-person assessments.

D-CARE: The Dementia Care Study: Design of a Pragmatic Trial of the Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Health System-Based Versus Community-Based Dementia Care Versus Usual Dementia Care.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Although several approaches have been developed to provide comprehensive care for persons living with dementia (PWD) and their family or friend caregivers, the relative effectiveness and cost effectiveness of community-based dementia care (CBDC) versus health system-based dementia care (CBDC) and the effectiveness of both approaches compared with usual care (UC) are unknown. DESIGN: Pragmatic randomized three-arm superiority trial. The unit of randomization is the PWD/caregiver dyad. SETTING: Four clinical trial sites (CTSs) based in academic and clinical health systems. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2,150 English- or Spanish-speaking PWD who are not receiving hospice or residing in a nursing home and their caregivers. INTERVENTIONS: Eighteen months of (1) HSDC provided by a nurse practitioner or physician's assistant dementia care specialist who works within the health system, or (2) CBDC provided by a social worker or nurse care consultant who works at a community-based organization, or (3) UC with as needed referral to the Alzheimer's Association Helpline. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes: PWD behavioral symptoms and caregiver distress as measured by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q) Severity and Modified Caregiver Strain Index scales. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: NPI-Q Distress, caregiver unmet needs and confidence, and caregiver depressive symptoms. Tertiary outcomes: PWD long-term nursing home placement rates, caregiver-reported PWD functional status, cognition, goal attainment, "time spent at home," Dementia Burden Scale-Caregiver, a composite measure of clinical benefit, Quality of Life of persons with dementia, Positive Aspects of Caregiving, and cost effectiveness using intervention costs and Medicare claims. RESULTS: The results will be reported in the spring of 2024. CONCLUSION: D-CARE will address whether emphasis on clinical support and tighter integration with other medical services has greater benefit than emphasis on social support that is tied more closely to community resources. It will also assess the effectiveness of both interventions compared with UC and will evaluate the cost effectiveness of each intervention.

Receipt Of Home-Based Medical Care Among Older Beneficiaries Enrolled In Fee-For-Service Medicare.

Millions of older Americans are homebound and may benefit from home-based medical care. We characterized the receipt of this care among community-dwelling, fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries ages sixty-five and older surveyed in the National Health and Aging Trends Study between 2011 and 2017. Five percent of those surveyed received any home-based medical care between 2011 and 2017 (mean follow-up time per person was 3.4 years), and 75 percent of home-based medical care recipients were homebound. Only 11 percent of the total homebound population (approximately 4.4 million fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries in 2017) received any home-based medical care between 2011 and 2017. Receipt of home-based medical care was more common among homebound beneficiaries living in metropolitan areas and assisted living facilities, which suggests that geographic factors create operational efficiencies for home-based medical care practices that may improve their financial sustainability within the fee-for-service reimbursement setting. The significant unmet needs of this high-need, high-cost population and the known health and cost benefits of home-based medical care should spur stakeholders to expand the availability of this care.

Ten Things Every Geriatrician Should Know About House Calls.

Home-based primary care (HBPC) is experiencing a reemergence to meet the needs of homebound older adults. This brief review based on existing literature and expert opinion discusses 10 key facts about HBPC that every geriatrician should know: (1) the team-based nature of HBPC is key to its success; (2) preparations and after-hour access for house calls are required; (3) home safety for the clinician and patient must be considered; (4) being homebound is an independent mortality risk factor with a high symptom burden; (5) home care medicine presents unique benefits and challenges; (6) a systems-based approach to care is essential; (7) HBPC is a sustainable model within value-based care proven by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Independence at Home Medicare Demonstration Project; (8) HBPC has an educational mission; (9) national organizations for HBPC include American Academy of Home Care Medicine and Home Centered Care Institute; and (10) practicing HBPC is a privilege. HBPC is a dynamic and unique practice model that will continue to grow in the future. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:139-144, 2019.

Who Is Providing the Predominant Care for Older Adults With Dementia?

OBJECTIVES: To identify which clinical specialties are most central for care of people with dementia in the community and long-term care (LTC) settings. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years with dementia. MEASUREMENTS: Specialty, categorized into primary care (internal or family medicine, geriatrics, or nurse practitioners [NPs]) versus other specialties, of the predominant provider of care (PPC) for each patient, defined by providing the most ambulatory visits. RESULTS: Among 2,598,719 beneficiaries with dementia, 74% lived in the community and 80% had a PPC in primary care. In LTC, 91% had primary care as their PPC compared with 77% in the community (P < .001). Cardiology and neurology were the most frequent specialties. NPs were PPCs for 19% of dementia patients in LTC versus 7% in the community (P < .001). CONCLUSION: It is unknown whether specialists are aware of their central role for many dementia patients' care needs. In LTC, NPs play the lead role as PPCs.