Operationalising the Recovery College model with people living with dementia: a realist review.

OBJECTIVES: Post-diagnostic support is a significant factor in facilitating personal recovery following a diagnosis of dementia, but access is often inconsistent and insufficient. Recovery Colleges offer peer-led, co-produced courses that can support people to have meaningful lives and have been adapted for use in the context of dementia. A realist review was conducted to understand the application and sustainability of Recovery College dementia courses. METHOD: An iterative, five-step process combined literature published to 2023 with knowledge from stakeholders with lived and professional experience of dementia involved with Recovery College dementia courses (PROSPERO registration CRD42021293687). RESULTS: Thirty-five documents and discussions with 19 stakeholders were used to build the initial programme theory comprising of 24 context-mechanism-outcome configurations. Reoccurring factors included: attending to aspects of co-production and course delivery to ensure they promoted inclusion and were not compromised by organisational pressures; how stigma impacted access to course opportunities; and embedding personal recovery principles throughout course development to be relevant for people living with dementia and those who support them. CONCLUSION: People struggling to reconcile their future alongside dementia need practical and emotional support to access and benefit from Recovery College dementia courses, ways to achieve this will be explored through a realist evaluation.

Adapted problem adaptation therapy for depression in mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease dementia: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Trials of effectiveness of treatment options for depression in dementia are an important priority. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial to assess adapted Problem Adaptation Therapy (PATH) for depression in mild/moderate dementia caused by Alzheimer's disease. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-six participants with mild or moderate dementia, >7 on Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD), randomized to adapted PATH or treatment as usual. Mean age 77.0 years, 39.0% males, mean Mini-Mental State Examination 21.6, mean CSDD 12.9. For primary outcome (CSDD at 6 months), no statistically significant benefit with adapted PATH on the CSDD (6 months: -0.58; 95% CI -1.71 to 0.54). The CSDD at 3 months showed a small benefit with adapted PATH (-1.38; 95% CI -2.54 to -0.21) as did the EQ-5D (-4.97; 95% CI -9.46 to -0.48). DISCUSSION: An eight-session course of adapted PATH plus two booster sessions administered within NHS dementia services was not effective treatment for depression in people with mild and moderate dementia. Future studies should examine the effect of more intensive and longer-term therapy.

Impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on neuropsychiatric symptoms and antipsychotic prescribing for people with dementia in nursing home settings.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on neuropsychiatric symptoms and antipsychotic use in people with dementia living in nursing homes. METHODS: This was a comparative analysis of baseline data from two large nursing home studies, one conducted during (COVID-iWHELD study) and one prior (WHELD study) to the pandemic. It involves data from 69 and 149 nursing homes, and 1006 and 666 participants respectively. Participants were people with established dementia (score >1 on Clinical Dementia Rating Scale). Resident data included demographics, antipsychotic prescriptions and neuropsychiatric symptoms using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Nursing Home version. Nursing home data collected were nursing home size and staffing information. RESULTS: Overall prevalence of neuropsychiatric symptoms was unchanged from pre-pandemic prevalence. Mean antipsychotic use across the sample was 32.0%, increased from 18% pre-pandemic (Fisher's exact test p < 0.0001). At a nursing home level, the medians for the low, medium and high tertiles for antipsychotic use were 7%, 20% and 59% respectively, showing a disproportionate rise in tertile three. Residents in these homes also showed a small but significant increase in agitation. CONCLUSION: There has been a significant increase in antipsychotic prescribing in nursing homes since the COVID-19 pandemic, with a disproportionate rise in one third of homes, where median prescription rates for antipsychotics were almost 60%. Strategies are urgently needed to identify these nursing homes and introduce pro-active support to bring antipsychotic prescription rates back to pre-pandemic levels.

Family carer perspectives on the language of behaviour change in dementia: an online mixed methods survey.

OBJECTIVE: following the #BanBPSD campaign there has been critical interest in common terminology used for 'changes in behaviour' associated with dementia. However, commentaries and emerging studies have not fully considered family carer perspectives. This study explores the views of family carers on terminology and language for this paradigm. METHOD: a mixed methods online survey was conducted with family carers. Language preferences were scoped and examined with supporting open-ended questions that explored the reasons for choices. RESULTS: about 229 family carers completed the survey. Terms such as Challenging Behaviour, Behaviour that Challenges and Behavioural and Psychological Symptoms of dementia were mostly disliked. The most preferred term was a new concept called 'Behavioural and Emotional Expressions of Need' that few people had previously heard of. Overall, carers preferred positively construed, easily understood, person-centred terms that attributed changes in behaviour to unmet need, which also acknowledged the carer's role in management. CONCLUSIONS: given that carers are often the agents of change for this paradigm-where they may also be called on to act as proxy decision makers, it is important that professionals take time to explore their understandings and give due consideration to the language used when offering tailored interventions. These findings suggest that frequently used terms for changes in behaviour associated with dementia, such as Challenging Behaviour, BtC and BPSD, should be avoided.

Professional perspectives on applying the NICE and British Psychological Society Guidelines for the management of Behaviours that Challenge in dementia care: an e-survey.

OBJECTIVES: Behaviours that challenge (BtC) reflect the most costly and burdensome aspects of dementia where non-pharmacological interventions rather than antipsychotic medication have been recommended as first-line approaches for over a decade (NICE 2006). This paper outlines professionals' views about their application of the Dementia NICE Guideline 97 (2018) and a British Psychological Society, Division of Clinical Psychology (BPS-DCP) Briefing paper (2013) on alternatives to antipsychotics. METHODS: A mixed-methods 34-item e-survey, with five items about the use of the NICE Guideline 97 (2018) and the BPS-DCP Briefing paper (2013) for the management of BtC, was conducted. Participants were recruited through multidisciplinary professional dementia networks across the United Kingdom. Quantitative data were descriptively summarized and thematic analysis of open-ended questions undertaken. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-seven participants completed the questions relating to guidelines. Mean ratings of 'moderately useful' for both the NICE and BPS-DCP guidance were obtained across professions and geographical locations, with the exception of psychiatrists who rated the NICE guidance as 'slightly useful'. The qualitative themes identified were a mix of positive and cautionary perspectives, relating to 'evidence base', the 'accessibility of the guides', 'problems with implementation', and 'lack of detail and clarity'. CONCLUSION: Professionals were cautiously positive regarding the guidance for BtC management, but highlighted a need for improved clarity about the use of non-pharmacological approaches, and more specificity about how these can be implemented in clinical settings. Tailored 'setting-specific' toolkits are required to update and refine the BPS-DCP (2013) if the aspirations of the NICE Dementia Guideline 97 (2018) are to inform professional practice. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Owing to major concerns about the problematic side effects of using psychotropics in the treatment of behaviours that challenge (BtC), there is a need for national guidance on the use on non-drug alternatives. The NICE (2018) guidance was seen by participants as accessible and clear but lacking in detail in the use of non-pharmacological interventions, which are the first-line treatments for BtC. The BPS Guidelines on 'Alternatives to antipsychotics' (2013) were seen as having good structured advice for allocating non-pharmacological resources but were lacking in flexibility for meeting individual needs or what might be an acceptable fit for clinical services. The findings suggest that we need to develop UK-wide bespoke specific advice for practitioners and services for both the use and the delivery of non-pharmacological evidence-based interventions for BtC.

Community Occupational Therapy for people with dementia and family carers (COTiD-UK) versus treatment as usual (Valuing Active Life in Dementia [VALID]) study: A single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to estimate the clinical effectiveness of Community Occupational Therapy for people with dementia and family carers-UK version (Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia-UK version [COTiD-UK]) relative to treatment as usual (TAU). We hypothesised that COTiD-UK would improve the ability of people with dementia to perform activities of daily living (ADL), and family carers' sense of competence, compared with TAU. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The study design was a multicentre, 2-arm, parallel-group, assessor-masked, individually randomised controlled trial (RCT) with internal pilot. It was conducted in 15 sites across England from September 2014 to January 2018. People with a diagnosis of mild to moderate dementia living in their own home were recruited in pairs with a family carer who provided domestic or personal support for at least 4 hours per week. Pairs were randomised to either receive COTiD-UK, which comprised 10 hours of occupational therapy delivered over 10 weeks in the person with dementia's home or TAU, which comprised the usual local service provision that may or may not include standard occupational therapy. The primary outcome was the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS) score at 26 weeks. Secondary outcomes for the person with dementia included the following: the BADLS scores at 52 and 78 weeks, cognition, quality of life, and mood; and for the family carer: sense of competence and mood; plus the number of social contacts and leisure activities for both partners. Participants were analysed by treatment allocated. A total of 468 pairs were recruited: people with dementia ranged from 55 to 97 years with a mean age of 78.6 and family carers ranged from 29 to 94 with a mean of 69.1 years. Of the people with dementia, 74.8% were married and 19.2% lived alone. Of the family carers, 72.6% were spouses, and 22.2% were adult children. On randomisation, 249 pairs were assigned to COTiD-UK (62% people with dementia and 23% carers were male) and 219 to TAU (52% people with dementia and 32% carers were male). At the 26 weeks follow-up, data were available for 364 pairs (77.8%). The BADLS score at 26 weeks did not differ significantly between groups (adjusted mean difference estimate 0.35, 95% CI -0.81 to 1.51; p = 0.55). Secondary outcomes did not differ between the groups. In total, 91% of the activity-based goals set by the pairs taking part in the COTiD-UK intervention were fully or partially achieved by the final COTiD-UK session. Study limitations include the following: Intervention fidelity was moderate but varied across and within sites, and the reliance on primarily proxy data focused on measuring the level of functional or cognitive impairment which may not truly reflect the actual performance and views of the person living with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Providing community occupational therapy as delivered in this study did not improve ADL performance, cognition, quality of life, or mood in people with dementia nor sense of competence or mood in family carers. Future research should consider measuring person-centred outcomes that are more meaningful and closely aligned to participants' priorities, such as goal achievement or the quantity and quality of activity engagement and participation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10748953.

Feasibility and acceptability evaluation of the Promoting Independence in Dementia (PRIDE) intervention for living well with dementia.

OBJECTIVES: Post-diagnostic psychosocial interventions could play an important role in supporting people with mild dementia remain independent. The Promoting Independence in Dementia (PRIDE) intervention was developed to address this. METHOD: The mixed methods non-randomized, pre-post feasibility study occurred across England. Facilitators were recruited from the voluntary sector and memory services. Participants and their supporters took part in the three-session intervention. Outcome measures were collected at baseline and follow-up. To evaluate acceptability, focus groups and interviews were conducted with a subsample of participants and facilitators. RESULTS: Contextual challenges to delivery including national research governance changes, affected recruitment of study sites. Thirty-four dyads consented, with 14 facilitators providing the intervention. Dyads took part in at least two sessions (79%), and 73% in all three. Outcome measures were completed by 79% without difficulty, with minimal missing data. No significant changes were found on pre and post assessments. Post hoc analysis found moderate effect size improvements for self-management (SMAS instrument) in people with dementia (d = 0.41) and quality of life (EQ5D measure) in carers (d = 0.40). Qualitative data indicated that dyads found PRIDE acceptable, as did intervention facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: The three-session intervention was well accepted by participant-dyads and intervention facilitators. A randomized controlled trial of PRIDE would need to carefully consider recruitment potential across geographically varied settings and site stratification according to knowledge of contextual factors, such as the diversity of post-diagnostic services across the country. Letting sites themselves be responsible for identifying suitable intervention facilitators was successful. The self-report measures showed potential to be included in the main trial.

UK clinicians' views on the use of formulations for the management of BPSD: a multidisciplinary survey.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The process of formulating in the area of dementia care is at an early stage of development. A review published in 2016, identified 14 different types of formulation-based approaches for the management of Behavioural and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia (BPSD). The present study examines professionals' views about the use of systematic formulations for choosing first-line non-pharmacological interventions for BPSD. METHODS: A 34-item online survey, with six items about formulation-based interventions for the management of BPSD, was circulated to multi-disciplinary UK dementia networks. Quantitative data were examined for the use of formulation-based frameworks in practice. Thematic analyses provided insight into the practicalities of using formulations. RESULTS: The majority of the 355 participants responding to the questions stated they used formulation-led models to inform interventions, but 24% stated they did not. Thirty-two types of formulation frameworks were named, and there was a diverse spread across the UK. The Newcastle model was the most frequently used framework, with fifty percent of the participants who formulated reporting using this framework. Four themes regarding the use of formulation emerged, relating to function, process, reported outcomes and obstacles. CONCLUSION: Formulation-based approaches to targeting intervention are becoming popular in dementia care in the UK. More types of formulation frameworks are used in practice compared with the 2016 review. The use of formulations are seen as key to offering an alternative to pharmacological treatments. Understanding both the value of formulation-led approaches and the obstacles to their use are important to implementing NICE 2018 recommendations.

Bridging the divide between biomedical and psychosocial approaches in dementia research: the 2019 INTERDEM manifesto.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a new perspective on integrated biomedical and psychosocial dementia research. BACKGROUND: Dementia is being recognized as a multifactorial syndrome, but there is little interaction between biomedical and psychosocial approaches. A way to improve scientific knowledge is to seek better understanding of the mechanisms underlying the interaction between biomedical and psychosocial paradigms. One rationale for integrating biomedical and psychosocial research is the discordance between neuropathology and cognitive functioning. The concept of social health might bridge the two paradigms. It relates to how social resources influence the dynamic balance between capacities and limitations. HYPOTHESES: Social health can act as the driver for accessing cognitive reserve, in people with dementia through active facilitation and utilization of social and environmental resources. Thereby we link lifestyle social and opportunities to the brain reserve hypothesis. MANIFESTO: We provide a Manifesto on how to significantly move forward the dementia research agenda.

The language of behaviour changes in dementia: A mixed methods survey exploring the perspectives of people with dementia.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to explore the opinions of people with dementia, about the language used to describe changes in behaviour associated with dementia. DESIGN: This study adopted a human rights approach in a mixed methods convergent parallel synthesis design. METHODS: Online and paper-based questionnaire data were collected between November 2019 and March 2020. A combination of convenience and purposive sampling was used to invite people with dementia to participate. RESULTS: In total, 54 people completed the survey. There was no clear consensus on a preferred term, but 28.3% preferred the term 'unmet needs' for describing changes in behaviour associated with dementia. Qualitative data revealed important nuances and challenges for researchers and practitioners in relation to terminology for this paradigm. Participants felt that the language we use to talk about changes in behaviour could influence how people with dementia are viewed and treated and how people feel about themselves. CONCLUSION: The majority of participants were familiar with a range of terminology. There was no universal agreement on terminology, but there was an overall preference for terms that reflect the unmet needs likely to underlie perceived changes in behaviour. IMPACT: People with dementia raised concerns about the language used to describe changes in behaviour that can occur in dementia. There is scope for improvements in the language used for this paradigm in both research and practice. Following a diagnosis of dementia, clinicians need to take the time to explore an individual's preferences and understandings. They can then share their own understanding about the potential for changed behaviour and if relevant, how any negative impact of this may be minimized.

Measuring the well-being of people with dementia: a conceptual scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Enabling people with dementia to 'live well' is a policy and research priority in many countries. However, instruments for measuring outcomes of psychosocial interventions designed to promote well-being in dementia are often derived from a symptom-focused, loss/deficit approach, or from broad quality of life concepts. A pan-European dementia working group called for research on the development of an alternative asset/strengths-based conceptual framework of well-being in dementia. This paper takes forward this recommendation by developing such a framework and using this to map relevant self-report outcome measures. METHODS: Three scoping reviews of published studies were conducted iteratively. First, we examined the literature on lived experiences of well-being and quality of life in people with dementia and then the wider dementia literature for application of well-being constructs. The synthesised findings generated conceptual domains of well-being in people with dementia. Corresponding self-report instruments used in dementia research were scoped, categorised within the conceptual framework and their potential value in measuring outcomes for people with dementia was examined. FINDINGS: Six conceptual domains for the measurement of well-being and 35 self-report instruments that have been used with people with dementia were identified. Six instruments were developed specifically for people with dementia, five were derived from the gerontological literature and 24 from the well-being literature. Fifteen instruments and one sub-scale have been examined for psychometric properties amongst people with dementia. To date, 20 have been used as outcome measures, with seven measuring change over time. A number of identified instruments utilise traditional retrospective Likert-scaling response formats, limiting their potential for use with some groups of people with dementia. CONCLUSION: An assets/strengths-based framework is presented, outlining structural domains for selecting self-report measures of well-being in people with dementia. It provides a foundation for enhancing research into processes and outcomes of psychosocial interventions, including instrument development, more precise matching of intervention aims with outcome measurement, and newer technology-based 'in-the-moment' measurement.

Developing a model of best practice for teams managing crisis in people with dementia: a consensus approach.

BACKGROUND: Teams delivering crisis resolution services for people with dementia and their carers provide short-term interventions to prevent admission to acute care settings. There is great variation in these services across the UK. This article reports on a consensus process undertaken to devise a Best Practice Model and evaluation Tool for use with teams managing crisis in dementia. METHODS: The Best Practice Model and Tool were developed over a three stage process: (i) Evidence gathering and generation of candidate standards (systematic review and scoping survey, interviews and focus groups); (ii) Prioritisation and selection of standards (consultation groups, a consensus conference and modified Delphi process); (iii) Refining and operationalising standards (consultation group and field-testing). RESULTS: One hundred sixty-five candidate standards arose from the evidence gathering stage; were refined and reduced to 90 through a consultation group exercise; and then reduced to 50 during the consensus conference and weighted using a modified Delphi process. Standards were then operationalised through a clinical consultation group and field-tested with 11 crisis teams and 5 non-crisis teams. Scores ranged from 48 to 92/100. The median score for the crisis teams was 74.5 (range 67-92), and the median score for non-crisis teams was 60 (range 48-72). CONCLUSIONS: With further psychometric testing, this Best Practice Model and Tool will be ideal for the planning, improvement and national benchmarking of teams managing dementia crises in the future.

Psychosocial interventions for people with dementia: a synthesis of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVES: Over the last 10 years there has been a multitude of studies of psychosocial interventions for people with dementia. However, clinical services face a dilemma about which intervention should be introduced into clinical practice because of the inconsistency in some of the findings between different studies and the differences in the study qualities and trustworthiness of evidence. There was a need to provide a comprehensive summary of the best evidence to illustrate what works. METHODS: A review of the systematic reviews of psychosocial interventions in dementia published between January 2010 and February 2016 was conducted. RESULTS: Twenty-two reviews (8 physical, 7 cognitive, 1 physical/cognitive and 6 other psychosocial interventions) with a total of 197 unique studies met the inclusion criteria. Both medium to longer-term multi-component exercise of moderate to high intensity, and, group cognitive stimulation consistently show benefits. There is not sufficient evidence to determine whether psychological or social interventions might improve either mood or behaviour due to the heterogeneity of the studies and interventions included in the reviews. CONCLUSION: There is good evidence that multi-component exercise with sufficient intensity improves global physical and cognitive functions and activities of daily living skills. There is also good evidence that group-based cognitive stimulation improves cognitive functions, social interaction and quality of life. This synthesis also highlights the potential importance of group activities to improve social integration for people with dementia. Future research should investigate longer-term specific outcomes, consider the severity and types of dementia, and investigate mechanisms of change.

Impact of person-centred care training and person-centred activities on quality of life, agitation, and antipsychotic use in people with dementia living in nursing homes: A cluster-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Agitation is a common, challenging symptom affecting large numbers of people with dementia and impacting on quality of life (QoL). There is an urgent need for evidence-based, cost-effective psychosocial interventions to improve these outcomes, particularly in the absence of safe, effective pharmacological therapies. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a person-centred care and psychosocial intervention incorporating an antipsychotic review, WHELD, on QoL, agitation, and antipsychotic use in people with dementia living in nursing homes, and to determine its cost. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This was a randomised controlled cluster trial conducted between 1 January 2013 and 30 September 2015 that compared the WHELD intervention with treatment as usual (TAU) in people with dementia living in 69 UK nursing homes, using an intention to treat analysis. All nursing homes allocated to the intervention received staff training in person-centred care and social interaction and education regarding antipsychotic medications (antipsychotic review), followed by ongoing delivery through a care staff champion model. The primary outcome measure was QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy). Secondary outcomes were agitation (Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory [CMAI]), neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home Version [NPI-NH]), antipsychotic use, global deterioration (Clinical Dementia Rating), mood (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia), unmet needs (Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly), mortality, quality of interactions (Quality of Interactions Scale [QUIS]), pain (Abbey Pain Scale), and cost. Costs were calculated using cost function figures compared with usual costs. In all, 847 people were randomised to WHELD or TAU, of whom 553 completed the 9-month randomised controlled trial. The intervention conferred a statistically significant improvement in QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy Z score 2.82, p = 0.0042; mean difference 2.54, SEM 0.88; 95% CI 0.81, 4.28; Cohen's D effect size 0.24). There were also statistically significant benefits in agitation (CMAI Z score 2.68, p = 0.0076; mean difference 4.27, SEM 1.59; 95% CI -7.39, -1.15; Cohen's D 0.23) and overall neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI-NH Z score 3.52, p < 0.001; mean difference 4.55, SEM 1.28; 95% CI -7.07,-2.02; Cohen's D 0.30). Benefits were greatest in people with moderately severe dementia. There was a statistically significant benefit in positive care interactions as measured by QUIS (19.7% increase, SEM 8.94; 95% CI 2.12, 37.16, p = 0.03; Cohen's D 0.55). There were no statistically significant differences between WHELD and TAU for the other outcomes. A sensitivity analysis using a pre-specified imputation model confirmed statistically significant benefits in DEMQOL-Proxy, CMAI, and NPI-NH outcomes with the WHELD intervention. Antipsychotic drug use was at a low stable level in both treatment groups, and the intervention did not reduce use. The WHELD intervention reduced cost compared to TAU, and the benefits achieved were therefore associated with a cost saving. The main limitation was that antipsychotic review was based on augmenting processes within care homes to trigger medical review and did not in this study involve proactive primary care education. An additional limitation was the inherent challenge of assessing QoL in this patient group. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the WHELD intervention confers benefits in terms of QoL, agitation, and neuropsychiatric symptoms, albeit with relatively small effect sizes, as well as cost saving in a model that can readily be implemented in nursing homes. Future work should consider how to facilitate sustainability of the intervention in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN62237498.

Social health in dementia care: harnessing an applied research agenda.

The notion of social health (Huber et al., 2011) as applied to dementia care research was introduced to redress the balance of empirical studies that tended to focus on biomedical, cognitive, and functional status in dementia (Vernooij-Dassen and Jeon, 2016). The introduction of social health has followed the zeitgeist of campaigners for a better life for those living with dementia, with initiatives to improve the social images of dementia (Alzheimers.org, 2017). Examples from social research in dementia to examine friendships and the social environments of people with dementia exist (Medeiros et al., 2012), but introduction of the paradigm of social health in dementia (Vernooij-Dassen and Jeon, 2016) has harnessed a growing research agenda (de Vugt and Dröes, 2017). This paradigm provides an umbrella concept to study how social aspects influence the dynamic balance between opportunities and limitations in dementia. Social health goes beyond the neuropathology of dementia, to understand how people, their social networks and wider society with its norms, interact with the condition (Vernooij-Dassen and Jeon, 2016). It is not far removed from the ideas of Tom Kitwood, the pioneer of person-centered dementia care, who noted that "personhood is a standing or status that is bestowed upon one human being, by others, in the context of relationship and social being" (Kitwood, 1997). The INTERDEM (Early detection and timely INTERvention in DEMentia, www.interdem.org) psychosocial research agenda aspired to improve knowledge about social inclusion and reciprocal relationships for people with dementia (Moniz-Cook et al., 2011). The concept of social health (Vernooij-Dassen and Jeon, 2016) with its dimensions for dementia research (Dröes et al., 2017) has begun to develop this knowledge-base.

Through the eyes of others - the social experiences of people with dementia: a systematic literature review and synthesis.

ABSTRACTBackground:Psychosocial models suggest that the lived experience of dementia is affected by interpersonal factors such as the ways in which others view, talk about, and behave toward the person with dementia. This review aimed to illuminate how informal, everyday interpersonal relationships are experienced by people with dementia within their social contexts. METHOD: A systematic review of qualitative literature published between 1989 and May 2016 was conducted, utilizing the electronic databases PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and CINAHL-Complete. This was followed by a critical interpretative synthesis to understand how people with dementia perceive the attitudes, views, and reactions of other people toward them, and the subjective impact that these have. RESULTS: Four major themes were derived from the findings of the 23 included studies: being treated as an "other" rather than "one of us"; being treated as "lesser" rather than a full, valued member of society; the impact of others' responses; and strategies to manage the responses of others. Thus, people with dementia can feel outcast and relegated, or indeed feel included and valued by others. These experiences impact upon emotional and psychological well-being, and are actively interpreted and managed by people with dementia. CONCLUSION: Experiences such as loss and diminishing identity have previously been understood as a direct result of dementia, with little consideration of interpersonal influences. This review notes that people with dementia actively engage with others, whose responses can foster or undermine social well-being. This dynamic relational aspect may contribute to emerging understandings of social health in dementia.

Towards capturing meaningful outcomes for people with dementia in psychosocial intervention research: A pan-European consultation.

BACKGROUND: People with dementia are often marginalized and excluded from influence, also in relation to dementia research. There is, however, a growing requirement for inclusion through Patient and Public Involvement (PPI), but there is still limited knowledge on how researchers can fully benefit from the involvement of people with dementia in the development and testing of psychosocial interventions. This paper describes the results of a pan-European consultation with people with dementia, synthesizing their views on outcomes of psychosocial interventions. OBJECTIVE: To involve people with dementia in establishing what are meaningful outcomes when participating in psychosocial interventions. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Consultations took place at four divergent sites across Europe, involving twenty-five people with dementia from nine European countries. METHODS: The methods used for the consultation were developed through an iterative process involving people with dementia. Data from the consultation were analysed from a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: The results suggested that people with dementia wish to participate in interventions that enhance their well-being, confidence, health, social participation and human rights. This highlights a need for improvements in psychosocial research to capture these outcomes. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Involving people with dementia in discussions of psychosocial interventions has enhanced our understanding about meaningful outcome measures in research and methods of data collection. This study suggests that new outcome measures in psychosocial research are needed where concepts of positive psychology and social health can guide innovation and outcome measurement.

Alzheimer Europe's position on involving people with dementia in research through PPI (patient and public involvement).

This paper reflects Alzheimer Europe's position on PPI (patient and public involvement) in the context of dementia research and highlights some of the challenges and potential risks and benefits associated with such meaningful involvement. The paper was drafted by Alzheimer Europe in collaboration with members of INTERDEM and the European Working Group of People with Dementia. It has been formally adopted by the Board of Alzheimer Europe and endorsed by the Board of INTERDEM and by the JPND working group 'Dementia Outcome Measures - Charting New Territory'. Alzheimer Europe is keen to promote the involvement of people with dementia in research, not only as participants but also in the context of PPI, by generating ideas for research, advising researchers, being involved in consultations and being directly involved in research activities. This position paper is in keeping with this objective. Topics covered include, amongst others, planning involvement, establishing roles and responsibilities, training and support, managing information and input from PPI, recognising the contribution of people with dementia involved in research in this way, promoting and protecting the rights and well-being of people with dementia, training and support, and promoting an inclusive approach and the necessary infrastructure for PPI in dementia research.

The impact of individual Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (iCST) on cognition, quality of life, caregiver health, and family relationships in dementia: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is a well-established group psychosocial intervention for people with dementia. There is evidence that home-based programmes of cognitive stimulation delivered by family caregivers may benefit both the person and the caregiver. However, no previous studies have evaluated caregiver-delivered CST. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a home-based, caregiver-led individual cognitive stimulation therapy (iCST) program in (i) improving cognition and quality of life (QoL) for the person with dementia and (ii) mental and physical health (well-being) for the caregiver. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A single-blind, pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted at eight study sites across the United Kingdom. The intervention and blinded assessment of outcomes were conducted in participants' homes. Three hundred fifty-six people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers were recruited from memory services and community mental health teams (CMHTs). Participants were randomly assigned to iCST (75, 30-min sessions) or treatment as usual (TAU) control over 25 wk. iCST sessions consisted of themed activities designed to be mentally stimulating and enjoyable. Caregivers delivering iCST received training and support from an unblind researcher. Primary outcomes were cognition (Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive [ADAS-Cog]) and self-reported QoL (Quality of Life Alzheimer's Disease [QoL-AD]) for the person with dementia and general health status (Short Form-12 health survey [SF-12]) for the caregiver. Secondary outcomes included quality of the caregiving relationship from the perspectives of the person and of the caregiver (Quality of the Carer Patient Relationship Scale) and health-related QoL (European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions [EQ-5D]) for the caregiver. Intention to treat (ITT) analyses were conducted. At the post-test (26 wk), there were no differences between the iCST and TAU groups in the outcomes of cognition (mean difference [MD] = -0.55, 95% CI -2.00-0.90; p = 0.45) and self-reported QoL (MD = -0.02, 95% CI -1.22-0.82; p = 0.97) for people with dementia, or caregivers' general health status (MD = 0.13, 95% CI -1.65-1.91; p = 0.89). However, people with dementia receiving iCST rated the relationship with their caregiver more positively (MD = 1.77, 95% CI 0.26-3.28; p = 0.02), and iCST improved QoL for caregivers (EQ-5D, MD = 0.06, 95% CI 0.02-0.10; p = 0.01). Forty percent (72/180) of dyads allocated to iCST completed at least two sessions per week, with 22% (39/180) completing no sessions at all. Study limitations include low adherence to the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that iCST has an effect on cognition or QoL for people with dementia. However, participating in iCST appeared to enhance the quality of the caregiving relationship and caregivers' QoL. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The iCST trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (identified ISRCTN 65945963, URL: DOI 10.1186/ISRCTN65945963).

The contribution of caregiver psychosocial factors to distress associated with behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to examine caregiver factors as predictors of BPSD-related distress and their potential mechanisms. METHOD: Informal caregivers of people with dementia (n = 157) recruited from 28 community mental health teams in six NHS Trusts across England completed questionnaires regarding psychosocial factors (relationship quality, competence, guilt, health-related quality of life in the caregiver and person with dementia, reactivity to behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia [BPSD] and burden) and frequency of BPSD. Analyses of BPSD-related distress include hierarchical multiple regression, mediation, moderation and path analysis. RESULTS: Caregiver psychosocial factors explained 56% of the variance in BPSD-related distress. After controlling for these factors, frequency of BPSD was not a significant predictor of BPSD-related distress. Caregiver reactivity to BPSD, burden, competence and relationship quality directly influenced BPSD-related distress. Guilt influenced distress indirectly via competence, burden and reactivity to BPSD. The final model accounted for 41% of the variance in BPSD-related distress and achieved a good fit to the data (χ2 = 23.920, df = 19, p = 0.199). CONCLUSIONS: Caregiver psychosocial factors including sense of competence, guilt, burden and reactivity to BPSD contribute to BPSD-related distress. Tailored interventions for managing behaviour problems in family settings could focus on these factors associated with BPSD-related distress to minimise distress in families. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.