Introduction of a Management Toolkit for Lewy Body Dementia: A Pilot Cluster-Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Lewy body dementia, comprising both dementia with Lewy bodies and Parkinson's disease dementia, is challenging to manage because of a complex symptom profile and lack of clear evidence-based management guidelines. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the feasibility of undertaking a cluster randomized study of the introduction of an evidence-based management toolkit for Lewy body dementia, assessing the outcomes for patients and carers as secondary measures. METHODS: We randomized 23 memory/dementia, movement disorder, or nonspecialist secondary care services to the management toolkit or usual care. People with dementia with Lewy bodies or Parkinson's disease dementia underwent assessments of cognition, motor and neuropsychiatric symptoms, and global outcome at baseline and 3 and 6 months. Healthcare, personal and social care costs, and carer-related outcomes of carer stress, depression, and anxiety were also examined. RESULTS: A total of 131 participants were recruited (target 120), for whom 6-month data were available on 108 (83%). There was a benefit of being in the intervention arm for carers (reduced Zarit Burden Scale [P < 0.01], reduced depressive symptoms [P < 0.05]), who also reported less marked patient deterioration on the global outcome measure (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in other outcomes or in costs between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of an evidence-based management toolkit for Lewy body dementia was feasible and associated with some benefits, especially for carers. © 2020 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Implementing post-diagnostic support for people living with dementia in England: a qualitative study of barriers and strategies used to address these in practice.

BACKGROUND: inequalities and gaps in post-diagnostic support (PDS) for people with dementia persist despite a policy focus on dementia in England and Wales. Understanding and overcoming the factors contributing to these inequalities is vital to improve care for people living with dementia (PLWD) and their families. OBJECTIVE: to explore common barriers to the delivery of PDS in England and Wales and describe successful strategies to address them, drawing on examples from current practice. DESIGN: qualitative semi-structured interviews, focus groups and observation. SETTINGS: Phase 1: interviewees were drawn from multiple sectors across England and Wales, including NHS clinical commissioning groups and social care. Phase 2: six case study sites based in different sectors (primary care, secondary mental health and third sector) in England. PARTICIPANTS: Phase 1: 61 professionals, including commissioners and service managers. Phase 2: 68 professionals, including frontline staff and those working in related services; 17 PLWD; 31 carers. RESULTS: barriers to implementing PDS in dementia were an unsupportive infrastructure, limited proactive review and limited capacity and capability particularly in primary care. Strategies used successfully in practice to address these challenges included creating opportunities for service development, improving joint working, supporting non-specialists and developing ongoing, holistic review and care planning. CONCLUSION: a range of practical strategies have been identified to address many of the common barriers to PDS in dementia. To achieve policy goals of a task-shifted and task-shared approach to PDS, widespread use of these strategies is recommended.

The value of dementia care towards the end of life-A contingent valuation study.

OBJECTIVES: A dementia nurse specialist (DNS) is expected to improve the quality of care and support to people with dementia nearing, and at, the end of life (EoL) by facilitating some key features of care. The aim of this study was to estimate willingness-to-pay (WTP) values from the general public perspective, for the different levels of support that the DNS can provide. METHODS: Contingent valuation methods were used to elicit the maximum WTP for scenarios describing different types of support provided by the DNS for EoL care in dementia. In a general population online survey, 1002 participants aged 18 years or more sampled from the United Kingdom provided valuations. Five scenarios were valued with mean WTP value calculated for each scenario along with the relationship between mean WTP and participant characteristics. RESULTS: The mean WTP varied across scenarios with higher values for the scenarios offering more features. Participants with some experience of dementia were willing to pay more compared with those with no experience. WTP values were higher for high-income groups compared with the lowest income level (P < .05). There was no evidence to suggest that respondent characteristics such as age, gender, family size, health utility or education status influenced the WTP values. CONCLUSION: The general population values the anticipated improvement in dementia care provided by a DNS. This study will help inform judgements on interventions to improve the quality of EoL care.

Service organisation for people with dementia after an injurious fall: challenges and opportunities.

INTRODUCTION: people with dementia are more likely to fall and less likely to recover well after a fall than cognitively intact older people. Little is known about how best to deliver services to this patient group. This paper explored current service provision to help inform the development of a new intervention. METHODS: qualitative approaches were used to explore the views and experiences of people with dementia, family carers and professionals providing services to people with dementia following an injurious fall. These data were analysed using a thematic, iterative analysis. FINDINGS: while a wide range of services potentially relevant to people with dementia was identified, there were no dedicated services for people with dementia with fall-related injuries in our three geographical areas. Factors influencing service uptake included a lack of knowledge of local provision amongst professionals and underdeveloped information sharing systems. Some aspects of current service organisation were incompatible with the needs of people with dementia. These include an emphasis on time-limited interventions; lack of longer-term follow-up; and service delivery in environments that could be challenging for people with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: care pathways for people with dementia who fall are fragmented and unclear. This is likely to preclude people with dementia from receiving all appropriate support and contribute to poor recovery following a fall. The findings highlight the need for new approaches to service organisation and delivery which address the specific needs of people with dementia who fall.

Developing an Intervention for Fall-Related Injuries in Dementia (DIFRID): an integrated, mixed-methods approach.

BACKGROUND: Falls in people with dementia can result in a number of physical and psychosocial consequences. However, there is limited evidence to inform how best to deliver services to people with dementia following a fall. The aim of the DIFRID study was to determine the feasibility of developing and implementing a new intervention to improve outcomes for people with dementia with fall-related injuries; this encompasses both short-term recovery and reducing the likelihood of future falls. This paper details the development of the DIFRID intervention. METHODS: The intervention was designed using an integrated, mixed-methods approach. This involved a realist synthesis of the literature and qualitative data gathered through interviews and focus groups with health and social care professionals (n = 81). An effectiveness review and further interviews and observation were also conducted and are reported elsewhere. A modified Delphi panel approach with 24 experts was then used to establish a consensus on how the findings should translate into a new intervention. After feedback from key stakeholders (n = 15) on the proposed model, the intervention was manualised and training developed. RESULTS: We identified key components of a new intervention covering three broad areas: • Ensuring that the circumstances of rehabilitation are optimised for people with dementia • Compensating for the reduced ability of people with dementia to self-manage • Equipping the workforce with the necessary skills and information to care for this patient group Consensus was achieved on 54 of 69 statements over two rounds of the Delphi surveys. The statements were used to model the intervention and finalise the accompanying manual and protocol for a feasibility study. Stakeholder feedback was generally positive and the majority of suggested intervention components were approved. The proposed outcome was a 12-week complex multidisciplinary intervention primarily based at the patient's home. CONCLUSIONS: A new intervention has been developed to improve outcomes for people with dementia following a fall requiring healthcare attention. The feasibility of this intervention is currently being tested. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN41760734 (16/11/2015).

Equipping staff with the skills to maximise recovery of people with dementia after an injurious fall.

Objectives: People with dementia are more likely to fall and less likely to recover well after a fall than cognitively intact older people. Little is known about how best to deliver services to this patient group. This paper explores the importance of compensating for cognitive impairment when working with people with dementia. Methods: Qualitative methods - interviews, focus groups and observation - were used to explore the views and experiences of people with dementia, family carers and professionals providing services to people with dementia following an injurious fall. A thematic, iterative analysis was undertaken in which emerging themes were identified from each individual dataset, prior to an integrative analysis. Results: A key theme across all datasets was the need to deliver services in ways that compensate for cognitive impairment, such as negotiating meaningful activities that can be embedded into the routines of people with dementia. Professionals varied in their ability to adapt their practice to meet the needs of people with dementia. Negative attitudes towards dementia, a lack of knowledge and understanding of dementia limited the ability of some professionals to work in person-centred ways. Conclusion: Improving outcomes for people with dementia following a fall requires the principles of person-centred care to be enacted by professionals with a generic role, as well as specialist staff. This requires additional training and support by specialist staff to address the wide variability in current practice.

Non-pharmacological interventions for Lewy body dementia: a systematic review.

Lewy body dementia (consisting of dementia with Lewy bodies and Parkinson's disease dementia) is a common neurodegenerative disease characterised by visual hallucinations, fluctuating attention, motor disturbances, falls, and sensitivity to antipsychotics. This combination of features presents challenges for pharmacological management. Given this, we sought to review evidence for non-pharmacological interventions with patients with Lewy body dementia and their carers. Bibliographic databases were searched using a wide range of search terms and no restrictions were placed on study design, language, or clinical setting. Two reviewers independently assessed papers for inclusion, rated study quality, and extracted data. The search identified 21 studies including two randomised controlled trials with available subgroup data, seven case series, and 12 case studies. Most studies reported beneficial effects of the interventions used, though the only sizeable study was on dysphagia, showing a benefit of honey-thickened liquids. Given the heterogeneity of interventions and poor quality of the studies overall, no quantitative synthesis was possible. Overall, identified studies suggested possible benefits of non-pharmacological interventions in Lewy body dementia, but the small sample sizes and low quality of studies mean no definite recommendations can be offered. Our findings underscore the clear and urgent need for future research on this topic.

End-of-life care: A qualitative study comparing the views of people with dementia and family carers.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, UK policy has increasingly recognised the importance of end-of-life care in dementia. While professional consensus on optimal palliative care in dementia has been reported, little is known about the perspectives of people with dementia and family carers. AIM: To compare the views of people with dementia and family carers of people with dementia (current and recently bereaved) on optimal end-of-life care. DESIGN: Qualitative interviews (32) and a focus group were conducted. Data were thematically analysed. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Participants comprised people with early stage dementia, living at home in the north-east of England ( n = 11); and current and bereaved carers ( n = 25) from six services providing end-of-life care in England. FINDINGS: Seven areas were identified as important to end-of-life care for people with dementia and/or family carers. People with dementia and carers expressed the need for receiving care in place, ensuring comfort and a skilled care team. However, they disagreed about the importance of planning for the future and the role of families in organising care and future decision-making. CONCLUSION: Further comparison of our findings with expert consensus views highlighted key areas of divergence and agreement. Discordant views concerning perceptions of dementia as a palliative condition, responsibility for future decision-making and the practical co-ordination of end-of-life care may undermine the provision of optimal palliative care. Professionals must explore and recognise the individual perspectives of people with dementia and family carers.

What enables good end of life care for people with dementia? A multi-method qualitative study with key stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: People with advanced dementia often experience suboptimal end of life care (EoLC) with inadequate pain control, increased hospitalisation, and fewer palliative care interventions compared to those with cancer. Existing policy, guidance and recommendations are based largely on expert opinion because of a shortage of high quality, empirical research. Previous studies have tended to consider the views and experience of particular groups. Whilst providing important evidence, they do not take into account the diversity of perspectives of different stakeholders. The Supporting Excellence in End of life care in Dementia (SEED) programme involved multiple stakeholder groups and an integrative analysis to identify key components of good EoLC for people with dementia and to inform a new intervention. METHODS: The views of national experts, service managers, frontline staff, people with dementia and family carers were explored using a range of qualitative methods (semi-structured interviews, focus groups, discussions and observations of routine care). The large dataset comprises 116 interviews, 12 focus groups and 256 h of observation. Each dataset was initially analysed thematically prior to an integrative analysis, which drew out key themes across stakeholder groups. RESULTS: Through the integrative analysis seven key factors required for the delivery of good EoLC for people with dementia were identified: timely planning discussions; recognition of end of life and provision of supportive care; co-ordination of care; effective working relationships with primary care; managing hospitalisation; continuing care after death; and valuing staff and ongoing learning. These factors span the entire illness trajectory from planning at a relatively early stage in the illness to continuing care after death. CONCLUSIONS: This unique study has confirmed the relevance of much of the content of existing end of life frameworks to dementia. It has highlighted seven key areas that are particularly important in dementia care. The data are being used to develop an evidence-based intervention to support professionals to deliver better EoLC in dementia.

Development of assessment toolkits for improving the diagnosis of the Lewy body dementias: feasibility study within the DIAMOND Lewy study.

OBJECTIVE: The Lewy body dementias (LBD, dementia with Lewy bodies and Parkinson's disease dementia) are the second most common cause of neurodegenerative dementia but remain under-recognised, with long delays from initial assessment to diagnosis. Whilst validated instruments have been developed for key symptoms, there is no brief instrument for overall diagnostic assessment suitable for routine practice. We here report the development of such assessment toolkits. METHODS: We developed the LBD assessment toolkits in three stages. First, we conducted a systematic search for brief validated assessments for key symptoms and combined these into draft instruments. Second, we obtained feedback on acceptability and feasibility through two rounds of interviews with our patient and public involvement group. This led to modification of the toolkits. Finally, we piloted the toolkits in a feasibility study in routine dementia and Parkinson's disease services to produce final instruments suitable for routine clinical practice. RESULTS: Eleven clinicians, working in both dementia/memory assessment and Parkinson's disease/movement disorder services, consented to pilot the assessment toolkits and provide feedback on their feasibility. Clinicians worked in routine health service (not academic) settings and piloted the draft toolkits by integrating them into their regular clinical assessments. Feedback obtained informally, by written comments and through qualitative interviews led to modifications and production of final acceptable versions. CONCLUSIONS: We were able to address an important need, the under-diagnosis of LBD, by developing toolkits for improving the recognition and diagnosis of the LBD, which were acceptable to clinicians working in routine dementia and Parkinson's disease services. © 2016 The Authors. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Is there a preference for PET or SPECT brain imaging in diagnosing dementia? The views of people with dementia, carers, and healthy controls.

BACKGROUND: Positron emission tomography (PET) and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) brain imaging are widely used as diagnostic tools for suspected dementia but no studies have directly compared participant views of the two procedures. We used a range of methods to explore preferences for PET and SPECT. METHODS: Patients and controls (and accompanying carers) completed questionnaires immediately after undergoing PET and SPECT brain scans. Pulse rate data were collected during each scan. Scan attributes were prioritized using a card sorting exercise; carers and controls additionally answered willingness to pay (WTP) questions. RESULTS: Few differences were found either between the scans or groups of participants, although carers marginally preferred SPECT. Diagnostic accuracy was prioritized over other scan characteristics. Mean heart rate during both scans was lower than baseline heart rate measured at home (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Most participants viewed PET and SPECT scans as roughly equivalent and did not have a preference for either scan. Carer preference for SPECT is likely to reflect their desire to be with the patient (routine practice for SPECT but not for PET), suggesting that they should be able to accompany vulnerable patients throughout imaging procedures wherever possible. Pulse rate data indicated that brain imaging was no more stressful than a home visit (HV) from a researcher. The data do not support the anecdotal view that PET is a more burdensome procedure and the use of PET or SPECT scans in dementia should be based on diagnostic accuracy of the technique.

Expert views on the factors enabling good end of life care for people with dementia: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Dementia, of all long term illnesses, accounts for the greatest chronic disease burden, and the number of people with age-related diseases like dementia is predicted to double by 2040. People with advanced dementia experience similar symptoms to those dying with cancer yet professional carers find prognostication difficult and struggle to meet palliative care needs, with physical symptoms undetected and untreated. While elements of good practice in this area have been identified in theory, the factors which enable such good practice to be implemented in real world practice need to be better understood. The aim of this study was to determine expert views on the key factors influencing good practice in end of life care for people with dementia. METHODS: Semi-structured telephone and face-to-face interviews with topic guide, verbatim transcription and thematic analysis. Interviews were conducted with experts in dementia care and/or palliative care in England (n = 30). RESULTS: Four key factors influencing good practice in end of life care for people with dementia were identified from the expert interviews: leadership and management of care, integrating clinical expertise, continuity of care, and use of guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The relationships between the four key factors are important. Leadership and management of care have implications for the successful implementation of guidelines, while the appropriate and timely use of clinical expertise could prevent hospitalisation and ensure continuity of care. A lack of integration across health and social care can undermine continuity of care. Further work is needed to understand how existing guidelines and tools contribute to good practice. DISCLAIMER: This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research programme (Grant Reference Number RP-PG-0611-20005). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.

Making sense of a cognitive behavioural therapy intervention for fear of falling: qualitative study of intervention development.

BACKGROUND: Fear of Falling (FoF) is commonly reported among older adults (up to 50%) and can impact negatively on physical and social activities, mood and quality of life. This paper explores the development, acceptability and feasibility of a cognitive behavioural therapy intervention (CBTi) for FoF. METHODS: The process evaluation of the CBTi development phase of an RCT (conducted in the UK) reported here, used ethnographic methods. Data included: interviews with patients and carers (n = 16), clinic staff (n = 6) and the psychologists developing the CBTi (n = 3); observational field notes and transcripts of intervention development meetings (n = 9) and stakeholder engagement meetings (n = 2); and informal discussions with staff developing the CBTi (n = 8). Data collection and thematic analysis were guided by Normalisation Process Theory (NPT). RESULTS: The process evaluation showed two domains of work necessary to develop a CBTi that made sense to stakeholders, and that could be delivered as part of an RCT. For the psychologists developing the content of the CBTi, a growing understanding of the complexity of FoF highlighted the need for an individualised rather than a manualised intervention. For the research team, the work involved adapting the structures and processes of the RCT to address preliminary concerns over the acceptability and feasibility of the proposed CBTi. CONCLUSIONS: Theory-based approaches to process evaluation can sensitise researchers to contested understandings about proposed interventions that could undermine implementation. Drawing on the coherence construct of NPT, this study emphasises the nature and extent of work required to ensure an intervention makes sufficient sense to key stakeholders in order to maximise chances of successful implementation.

Understanding the challenges to implementing case management for people with dementia in primary care in England: a qualitative study using Normalization Process Theory.

BACKGROUND: Case management has been suggested as a way of improving the quality and cost-effectiveness of support for people with dementia. In this study we adapted and implemented a successful United States' model of case management in primary care in England. The results are reported elsewhere, but a key finding was that little case management took place. This paper reports the findings of the process evaluation which used Normalization Process Theory to understand the barriers to implementation. METHODS: Ethnographic methods were used to explore the views and experiences of case management. Interviews with 49 stakeholders (patients, carers, case managers, health and social care professionals) were supplemented with observation of case managers during meetings and initial assessments with patients. Transcripts and field notes were analysed initially using the constant comparative approach and emerging themes were then mapped onto the framework of Normalization Process Theory. RESULTS: The primary focus during implementation was on the case managers as isolated individuals, with little attention being paid to the social or organizational context within which they worked. Barriers relating to each of the four main constructs of Normalization Process Theory were identified, with a lack of clarity over the scope and boundaries of the intervention (coherence); variable investment in the intervention (cognitive participation); a lack of resources, skills and training to deliver case management (collective action); and limited reflection and feedback on the case manager role (reflexive monitoring). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the intuitive appeal of case management to all stakeholders, there were multiple barriers to implementation in primary care in England including: difficulties in embedding case managers within existing well-established community networks; the challenges of protecting time for case management; and case managers' inability to identify, and act on, emerging patient and carer needs (an essential, but previously unrecognised, training need). In the light of these barriers it is unclear whether primary care is the most appropriate setting for case management in England. The process evaluation highlights key aspects of implementation and training to be addressed in future studies of case management for dementia.

A qualitative study: professionals' experiences of advance care planning in dementia and palliative care, 'a good idea in theory but ...'.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning comprises discussions about an individual's wishes for future care while they have capacity. AIM: To explore professionals' experiences on the implementation of advance care planning in two areas of clinical care, dementia and palliative care. DESIGN: Qualitative study, focus groups and individual interviews. SETTING: North East of England. SAMPLE: Ninety-five participants from one Primary Care Trust, two acute National Health Service Hospital Trusts, one Ambulance Trust, one Local Authority and voluntary organisations and the legal sector. RESULTS: Fourteen focus groups and 18 interviews were held with 95 participants. While professionals agreed that advance care planning was a good idea in theory, implementation in practice presented them with significant challenges. The majority expressed uncertainty over the general value of advance care planning, whether current service provision could meet patient wishes, their individual roles and responsibilities and which aspects of advance care planning were legally binding; the array of different advance care planning forms and documentation available added to the confusion. In dementia care, the timing of when to initiate advance care planning discussions was an added challenge. CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified the professional, organisational and legal factors that influence advance care planning implementation; professional training should target these specific areas. There is an urgent need for standardisation of advance care planning documentation. Greater clarity is also required on the roles and responsibilities of different professional groups. More complex aspects of advance care planning may be better carried out by those with specialist skills and experience than by generalists caring for a wide range of patient groups with different disease trajectories.

Planning for tomorrow whilst living for today: the views of people with dementia and their families on advance care planning.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) is increasingly prominent in many countries; however, the evidence base for its acceptability and effectiveness is limited especially in conditions where cognition is impaired, as in dementia. METHOD: This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with people with mild to moderate dementia (n = 17) and family carers (n = 29) to investigate their views about planning for their future generally and ACP specifically. RESULTS: People with dementia and their families make a number of plans for the future. Most people undertook practical, personal, financial, and legal planning. However participants did not make formal advance care plans with the exception of appointing someone to manage their financial affairs. Five barriers to undertaking ACP were identified: lack of knowledge and awareness, difficulty in finding the right time, a preference for informal plans over written documentation, constraints on choice around future care, and lack of support to make choices about future healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: Health and social care professionals can build on people's preferences for informal planning by exploring the assumptions underlying them, providing information about the possible illness trajectory and discussing the options of care available. Health and social care professionals also have a role to play in highlighting the aspects of ACP which seem to be most relevant to the wishes and aspirations of people with dementia.

Food work and feeding assistance on hospital wards.

Approximately 60 per cent of UK patients aged 65 years or older are at risk of malnutrition or their situation worsening while in hospital. We report the results of a qualitative study embedded in research to prevent malnutrition in older people in hospital (the mappmal study). Our aim was to understand and describe processes that promote or inhibit nutrition in hospital. Throughout 2009 we examined meal services at four UK hospital sites across two regional locations, focusing on older patients admitted with dementia, for stroke or for fractured neck of femur. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with National Health Service staff (n = 54), stakeholders (n = 6), and a focus group with former patients and carers (n = 5). We identified ward-based food work as a technical and interpersonal challenge in narratives around malnutrition. Food work constituted two overlapping spheres of activity: interpersonal engagement through feeding assistance and reassurance and the arrangement of resources that facilitate meals such as the preparation of food trolleys. Our analysis is framed by the literature on emotional labour, dirty work and the professionalisation of nursing. We demonstrate how food work is overlooked by being conceptualised as common sense and as one of the most mundane and elementary tasks in hospitals.

Improving primary care based post-diagnostic support for people living with dementia and carers: Developing a complex intervention using the Theory of Change.

BACKGROUND: The need to improve support following a diagnosis of dementia is widely recognised, but it is unclear how this can best be achieved within UK health and social care systems. A task-shared and task-shifted approach has been recommended, but there is limited guidance on how to achieve this in practice. As part of a programme of research, we developed an intervention to enhance the role of primary care in post-diagnostic care and support for people living with dementia and carers. METHODS: We used the Theory of Change to develop a complex intervention informed by initial literature reviews and qualitative work. The intervention was developed through an iterative series of workshops, meetings and task groups with a range of stakeholders, including the multidisciplinary project team, people living with dementia and carers, service managers, frontline practitioners, and commissioners. RESULTS: 142 participants contributed to intervention development through face-to-face or virtual meetings. The intervention comprises three complementary strands of work focusing on: developing systems, delivering tailored care and support, and building capacity and capability. Clinical dementia leads, based in primary care networks, will facilitate the intervention providing tailored expertise and support. CONCLUSION: The Theory of Change proved useful in providing structure and engaging stakeholders. The process was challenging, took longer and was less participative than intended due to restrictions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. We will next conduct a feasibility and implementation study to explore whether the intervention can be successfully delivered within primary care. If successful, the intervention offers practical strategies for delivering a task-shared and task-shifted approach to post-diagnostic support that could be adapted for similar health and social care contexts internationally.

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.