Patient and public involvement and engagement with underserved communities in dementia research: Reporting on a partnership to co-design a website for postdiagnostic dementia support.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the advancements in Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE), the voices of traditionally underserved groups are still poorly reflected in dementia research. This study aimed to report on a PPIE partnership between academics and members of the public from underserved communities to co-design Forward with Dementia-Social Care, a resource and information website supporting people receiving a dementia diagnosis. METHODS: The PPIE partnership was set up in four stages: 1-identifying communities that have been under-represented from PPIE in dementia research; 2-recruiting PPIE partners from these communities; 3-supporting PPIE partners to become confident to undertake their research roles and 4-undertaking research co-design activities in an equitable fashion. RESULTS: To address under-representation from PPIE in dementia research we recruited seven PPIE partners from Black, Asian and other minority ethnic groups; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer+ communities; remote/rural area; religious minorities and partners living with rare forms of dementia. The partners met regularly throughout the project to oversee new sections for the study website, refine existing content and promote the website within their communities. CONCLUSION: Strategies can be used to successfully recruit and involve PPIE partners from underserved communities in co-design activities. These include networking with community leaders, developing terms of reference, setting out 'rules of engagement', and investing adequate resources and time for accessible and equitable involvement. These efforts facilitate the co-design of research outputs that reflect the diversity and complexity of UK contemporary society. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study received support from seven members of the public with lived experience of dementia from communities that have been traditionally underserved in dementia research. These seven members of the public undertook the role of partners in the study. They all equally contributed to the study design, recruitment of participants, development and revision of topic guides for the interviews and development of the website. Three of these partners were also co-authors of this paper. On top of the activities shared with the other partners, they contributed to write independently of the academic team the section in this paper titled 'Partners' experiences, benefits and challenges of the partnership'. Further, they provided input in other sections of the paper on a par with the other (academic) co-authors.

Unrepresented, unheard and discriminated against: A qualitative exploration of relatives' and professionals' views of palliative care experiences of people of African and Caribbean descent during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: People of African and Caribbean descent experienced disproportionately high mortality from COVID-19 and have poor access to palliative care. AIM: To explore palliative care experiences of people of African and Caribbean descent during and immediately prior to the pandemic. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study with thematic analysis. Refinement of themes/recommendations in consultation with an expert patient and public advisory group. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-six bereaved relatives and 13 health/social care professionals (cared for people of African and Caribbean descent) from throughout England, recruited using social media, community networks and direct advertising to over 150 organisations. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: Representation: Participants did not see themselves reflected in the palliative care services and did not expect their needs to be understood. Mistrust of the healthcare system and perceptions of racism were common and led to anticipation of inequitable care. Personalisation: Relatives and professionals reported a lack of cultural and religious sensitivity in healthcare. Assumptions were made based on ethnicity, and services not offered to all. Awareness and education: Professionals felt they lacked the knowledge to provide care to diverse communities, but were reluctant to ask, due to fear of making mistakes. Inequitable access to services was exacerbated by, but not unique to, the pandemic. Participants recommended raising awareness of palliative services, building professional competence in culturally-sensitive care, and greater ethnic diversity within services. CONCLUSIONS: Person-centred, culturally-competent palliative care is not the norm for people of African and Caribbean descent. Expectations of inequitable care are widespread. Sustained action on multiple fronts is needed.

Experiences of people with dementia and informal caregivers with post-diagnostic support: Data from the international COGNISANCE study.

OBJECTIVES: The study aims to describe people with dementia and informal caregivers' respective experiences of support after diagnosis and compares these experiences. Additionally, we determine how people with dementia and informal caregivers who are satisfied with support differ from those dissatisfied. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey study in Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, Poland, and United Kingdom was carried out to examine people with dementia and informal caregivers experience with support (satisfaction with information, access to care, health literacy, and confidence in ability to live well with dementia). The separate surveys contained closed questions. Analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests. RESULTS: Ninety people with dementia and 300 informal caregivers participated, and 69% of people with dementia and 67% of informal caregivers said support after diagnosis helped them deal more efficiently with their concerns. Up to one-third of people with dementia and informal caregivers were dissatisfied with information about management, prognosis, and strategies for living positively. Few people with dementia (22%) and informal caregivers (35%) received a care plan. People with dementia were more often satisfied with information, had more often confidence in their ability to live well with dementia, and were less often satisfied with access to care compared to informal caregivers. Informal caregivers who were satisfied with support were more satisfied with information and access to care compared to informal caregivers not satisfied with support. CONCLUSIONS: Experience of dementia support can be improved and people with dementia and informal caregiver differ in their experiences of support.

Changes to postdiagnostic dementia support in England and Wales during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the impact of COVID-19 on postdiagnostic dementia care and support provision in England and Wales. DESIGN: Qualitative research using semistructured interviews, via video or telephone conferencing. SETTING: Services providing postdiagnostic support across health, social care and the third sector. PARTICIPANTS: 21 professionals previously recruited to an ongoing research programme on postdiagnostic dementia care (or colleagues, if unavailable). RESULTS: Key themes identified from the data were: challenges caused by COVID-19; responses to those challenges, including a widespread shift to remote working; and effects of COVID-19 on future postdiagnostic support. Challenges included changing and sometimes conflicting guidelines; a lack of access to support; identifying and responding to emerging needs; emotional and physical impact of COVID-19; and balancing COVID-19 risk with other risks such as deterioration. Some dementia services closed, while others adapted and continued to provide support thus potentially widening existing inequalities. There were also some unintended positive outcomes, including improved cross-sector and multidisciplinary working between professionals. CONCLUSION: Delivering postdiagnostic dementia support during COVID-19 required essential adaptations. While some changes were detrimental to service users, others were identified as potentially beneficial and highly likely to become the new 'norm', for example, use of blended approaches, combining virtual and face-to-face work, thus allowing more flexible, integrated care. Our data have implications for policy and practice to improve the response to the lingering effects of COVID-19 as well as creating service provision that is more resilient to future pandemics or other periods of disruption.

Is fear of falling key to identifying gait and balance abnormalities in community-dwelling older adults? Protocol of a mixed-methods approach.

INTRODUCTION: The ageing population poses an increasing burden to public health systems, particularly as a result of falls. Falls have been associated with poor gait and balance, as measured by commonly used clinical tests for poor gait and balance. Falls in older adults have the potential to lead to long-term issues with mobility and a fear of falling (FoF). FoF is measured by a variety of instruments; the Falls Efficacy Scale International (FES-I) version is widely used within clinical and research arenas. The ability of the FoF, as measured by the FES-I to predict gait and balance abnormalities (GABAb) has not previously been measured; this study aims to be the first to investigate this prospective relationship. METHODS AND ANALYSES: To investigate the ability of the FES-I to predict GABAb a mixed-methods approach will be used, including quantitative, qualitative and health economics approaches. Initially the ability of the FES-I to identify poor gait and balance will be investigated, along with whether the measure is able to assess change in gait and balance in response to exercise training. The ability of an online FES-I tool to assess poor gait and balance in an alternative pre-existing online strength and balance programme will also be investigated. Interviews will be carried out to investigate participant experiences and motivations of those that are offered Age UK Strength and Balance Training, along with the views of healthcare professionals and Age UK staff involved within the process. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: NHS REC Approval has been granted (IRAS ID 314705). Study participation is voluntary; participants will be provided with all necessary information within the participant information sheet, with written consent being sought. Study findings will be disseminated through manuscripts in peer-reviewed journals, at scientific conferences and in a short report to participants and the funding body.

Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scales to Detect Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The largest proportion of people with dementia worldwide live in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs), with dementia prevalence continuing to rise. Assessment and diagnosis of dementia involves identifying the impact of cognitive decline on function, usually measured by instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs). OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to identify IADL measures which are specifically developed, validated, or adapted for use in LMICs to guide selection of such tools. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted (fourteen databases) up to April 2020. Only studies reporting on development, validation, or adaptation of IADL measures for dementia or cognitive impairment among older adults (aged over 50) in LMICs were included. The QUADAS 2 was used to assess quality of diagnostic accuracy studies. RESULTS: 22 papers met inclusion criteria; identifying 19 discrete IADL tools across 11 LMICs. These were either translated from IADL measures used in high-income countries (n = 6), translated and adapted for cultural differences (n = 6), or newly developed for target LMIC populations (n = 7). Seven measures were investigated in multiple studies; overall quality of diagnostic accuracy was moderate to good. CONCLUSION: Reliability, validity, and accuracy of IADL measures for supporting dementia diagnosis within LMICs was reported. Key components to consider when selecting an IADL tool for such settings were highlighted, including choosing culturally appropriate, time-efficient tools that account for gender- and literacy-bias, and can be conducted by any volunteer with appropriate training. There is a need for greater technical and external validation of IADL tools across different regions, countries, populations, and cultures.

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.

Massive Open Online Courses: enhancing caregiver education and support about dementia care towards and at end of life.

As the ageing population grows globally, the need for informal care-usually provided by family and friends-will continue to increase. Numbers of people with dementia also continue to rise, and much of their care will be provided by relatives. As such, more people who may themselves be older, will take on such caring roles. Consequently, more carers are likely to have education and support needs. Amidst government recognition of the need to provide good quality, person-centred education and support to carers, there are tensions between the potential for such provision to be resource intensive and whether existing services have the capacity to meet the needs of carers. Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are a resource with scope to meet some of these educational and support needs. MOOCs enable flexible learning, are often free, and can be accessed anywhere in the world. Providing supportive dementia care requires carers to have an understanding of the condition, assistance to cope with the responsibilities of caring, and recognition of the importance of their own health and wellbeing as well as the person they support. In response to the needs of family carers of people with advancing dementia identified through a 5 year programme of research, we developed a MOOC-dementia care: living well as dementia progresses. This is an accessible source of relevant and engaging information; which enables carers to learn about advancing dementia, consider their own needs and create an interactive global forum of peer support.

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.

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.

End of life care for people with dementia: The views of health professionals, social care service managers and frontline staff on key requirements for good practice.

BACKGROUND: Evidence consistently shows that people with advanced dementia experience suboptimal end of life care compared to those with cancer; with increased hospitalisation, inadequate pain control and fewer palliative care interventions. Understanding the views of those service managers and frontline staff who organise and provide care is crucial in order to develop better end of life care for people with dementia. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted from 2013 to 2015 with 33 service managers and 54 staff involved in frontline care, including doctors, nurses, nursing and care home managers, service development leads, senior managers/directors, care assistants and senior care assistants/team leads. All were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Participants represented a diverse range of service types and occupation. Transcripts were subject to coding and thematic analysis in data meetings. Analysis of the data led to the development of seven key themes: Recognising end of life (EOL) and tools to support end of life care (EOLC), Communicating with families about EOL, Collaborative working, Continuity of care, Ensuring comfort at EOL, Supporting families, Developing and supporting staff. Each is discussed in detail and comprise individual and collective views on approaches to good end of life care for people with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: The significant challenges of providing good end of life care for people with dementia requires that different forms of expertise should be recognised and used; including the skills and knowledge of care assistants. Successfully engaging with people with dementia and family members and helping them to recognise the dying trajectory requires a supportive integration of emotional and technical expertise. The study strengthens the existing evidence base in this area and will be used with a related set of studies (on the views of other stakeholders and observations and interviews conducted in four services) to develop an evidence-based intervention.

Healthcare organisation and delivery for people with dementia and comorbidity: a qualitative study exploring the views of patients, carers and professionals.

OBJECTIVES: People living with dementia (PLWD) have a high prevalence of comorbidty. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of dementia on access to non-dementia services and identify ways of improving service delivery for this population. DESIGN: Qualitative study involving interviews and focus groups. Thematic content analysis was informed by theories of continuity of care and access to care. SETTING: Primary and secondary care in the South and North East of England. PARTICIPANTS: PLWD who had 1 of the following comorbidities-diabetes, stroke, vision impairment, their family carers and healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the 3 conditions. RESULTS: We recruited 28 community-dwelling PLWD, 33 family carers and 56 HCPs. Analysis resulted in 3 overarching themes: (1) family carers facilitate access to care and continuity of care, (2) the impact of the severity and presentation of dementia on management of comorbid conditions, (3) communication and collaboration across specialities and services is not dementia aware. We found examples of good practice, but these tended to be about the behaviour of individual practitioners rather than system-based approaches; current systems may unintentionally block access to care for PLWD. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that, in order to improve access and continuity for PLWD and comorbidity, a significant change in the organisation of care is required which involves: coproduction of care where professionals, PLWD and family carers work in partnership; recognition of the way a patient's diagnosis of dementia affects the management of other long-term conditions; flexibility in services to ensure they are sensitive to the changing needs of PLWD and their family carers over time; and improved collaboration across specialities and organisations. Research is needed to develop interventions that support partnership working and tailoring of care for PLWD and comorbidity.

What is important at the end of life for people with dementia? The views of people with dementia and their carers.

BACKGROUND: Approaching end of life is often a time of vulnerability; this is particularly so for people with dementia and their families where loss of capacity and the ability to communicate, make assessment and shared decision-making difficult. Research has consistently shown that improvements in care and services are required to support better quality and more person-centred care for people with dementia towards and at end of life. However, the views of people with dementia about what factors contribute to high-quality care at this time are a neglected area. AIM: The aim of this study was to identify the aspects of end-of-life care for people with dementia that are most important to them and their carers. DESIGN: Q-methodology, a mixed method combining qualitative and quantitative techniques to study subjectivity, was used to identify the views of people with mild dementia, their family carers and bereaved carers on end-of-life care for people with dementia. Fifty-seven participants were included in the study. RESULTS: Four distinct views were identified: family involvement, living in the present, pragmatic expectations and autonomy and individuality. Some areas of consensus across all views included compassionate care, decisions being made by healthcare professionals and information availability when making decisions. CONCLUSION: Our findings reveal several different views on what is important about end-of-life care for people with dementia; therefore, a 'one-size-fits-all' approach to care is unlikely to be most appropriate. Notwithstanding the differing viewpoints could provide a framework for service providers and commissioners for future care. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

The effectiveness of collaborative care for people with memory problems in primary care: results of the CAREDEM case management modelling and feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: People with dementia and their families need support in different forms, but currently services are often fragmented with variable quality of care. Case management offers a way of co-ordinating services along the care pathway and therefore could provide individualised support; however, evidence of the effectiveness of case management for dementia is inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: To adapt the intervention used in a promising case management project in the USA and test its feasibility and acceptability in English general practice. DESIGN: In work package 1, a design group of varied professionals, with a carer and staff from the voluntary sector, met six times over a year to identify the skills and personal characteristics required for case management; protocols from the US study were adapted for use in the UK. The feasibility of recruiting general practices and patient-carer dyads and of delivering case management were tested in a pilot study (work package 2). An embedded qualitative study explored stakeholder views on study procedures and case management. SETTING: Four general practices, two in the north-east of England (Newcastle) one in London and one in Norfolk, took part in a feasibility pilot study of case management. PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling people with dementia and their carers who were not already being case managed by other services. INTERVENTION: A social worker shared by the two practices in the north-east and practice nurses in the other two practices were trained to deliver case management. We aimed to recruit 11 people with dementia from each practice who were not already being case managed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Numbers of people with dementia and their carers recruited, numbers and content of contacts, needs identified and perceptions of case management among stakeholders. RESULTS: Recruitment of practices and patients was slow and none of the practices achieved its recruitment target. It took more than 6 months to recruit a total of 28 people with dementia. Practice Quality and Outcome Framework registers for dementia contained only 60% of the expected number of people, most living in care homes. All stakeholders were positive about the potential of case management; however, only one of the four practices achieved a level of case management activity that might have influenced patient and carer outcomes. Case managers' activity levels were not related solely to time available for case management. Delivery of case management was hindered by limited clarity about the role, poor integration with existing services and a lack of embeddedness within primary care. There were discrepancies between case manager and researcher judgements about need, and evidence of a high threshold for acting on unmet need. The practice nurses experienced difficulties in ring-fencing case management time. CONCLUSIONS: The model of case management developed and evaluated in this feasibility study is unlikely to be sustainable in general practice under current conditions and in our view it would not be appropriate to attempt a definitive trial of this model. This study could inform the development of a case management role with a greater likelihood of impact. Different approaches to recruiting and training case managers, and identifying people with dementia who might benefit from case management, are needed, as is exploration of the scale of need for this type of working. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN74015152. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 52. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Going home? An ethnographic study of assessment of capacity and best interests in people with dementia being discharged from hospital.

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of patients in an acute hospital is made up of older people, many of whom have cognitive impairment or dementia. Rightly or wrongly, if a degree of confusion is apparent, it is often questioned whether the person is able to return to the previous place of residence. We wished to understand how, on medical wards, judgements about capacity and best interests with respect to going home are made for people with dementia and how decision-making around hospital discharge for people with dementia and their families might be improved. Our research reflects the jurisdiction in which we work, but the importance of residence capacity rests on its implications for basic human rights. METHODS: The research employed a ward-based ethnography. Observational data were captured through detailed fieldnotes, in-depth interviews, medical-record review and focus groups. Themes and key issues were identified using constant comparative analysis of 29 cases. Theoretical sampling of key stakeholders was undertaken, including patients with dementia (with and without residence capacity), their relatives and a range of practitioners. The research was carried out in three hospital wards (acute and rehabilitation) in two hospitals within two National Health Service (NHS) healthcare trusts in the North of England over a period of nine months between 2008 and 2009. RESULTS: Our analysis highlights the complexity of judgements about capacity and best interests in relation to decisions about place of residence for people with dementia facing discharge from hospital. Five key themes emerged from data: the complexity of borderline decisions; the requirement for better understanding of assessment approaches in relation to residence capacity; the need for better documentation; the importance of narrative; and the crucial relevance of time and timing in making these decisions. CONCLUSIONS: We need: more support and training for practitioners, as well as support for patients and families; clarity about the information to be imparted to the person with dementia; more advocacy for people with dementia; appropriate assessments embedded in routine clinical practice; the patient with dementia to be centre-stage; and properly resourced step-down or rehabilitation units to facilitate timely and good decision-making about place of residence.

Homeward bound or bound for a home? Assessing the capacity of dementia patients to make decisions about hospital discharge: comparing practice with legal standards.

BACKGROUND: This article stems from a larger project which considers ways of improving assessments of capacity and judgements about best interests in connection with people with dementia admitted to acute hospitals with respect to decisions about place of residence. AIMS: Our aim is to comment on how assessments of residence capacity are actually performed on general hospital wards compared with legal standards for the assessment of capacity set out in the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA). METHOD: Our findings are grounded in ethnographic ward-based observations and in-depth interviews conducted in three hospital wards, in two hospitals (acute and rehabilitation), within two NHS healthcare trusts in the North of England over a period of nine months between 2008 and 2009. Twenty-nine patient cases were recruited to the study. We also draw from broader conceptions of capacity found in domestic and international legal, medical, ethical and social science literature. RESULTS: Our findings suggest that whilst professionals profess to be familiar with broad legal standards governing the assessment of capacity under the MCA, these standards are not routinely applied in practice in general hospital settings when assessing capacity to decide place of residence on discharge from hospital. We discuss whether the criteria set out in the MCA and the guidance in its Code of Practice are sufficient when assessing residence capacity, given the particular ambiguities and complexities of this capacity. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude by suggesting that more specific legal standards are required when assessing capacity in this particular context.

The impact of organisational culture on the delivery of person-centred care in services providing respite care and short breaks for people with dementia.

Ensuring the development and delivery of person-centred care in services providing respite care and short breaks for people with dementia and their carers has a number of challenges for health and social service providers. This article explores the role of organisational culture in barriers and facilitators to person-centred dementia care. As part of a mixed-methods study of respite care and short breaks for people with dementia and their carers, 49 telephone semi-structured interviews, two focus groups (N= 16) and five face-to-face in-depth interviews involving front-line staff and operational and strategic managers were completed in 2006-2007. Qualitative thematic analysis of transcripts identified five themes on aspects of organisational culture that are perceived to influence person-centred care: understandings of person-centred care, attitudes to service development, service priorities, valuing staff and solution-focused approaches. Views of person-centred care expressed by participants, although generally positive, highlight a range of understandings about person-centred care. Some organisations describe their service as being person-centred without the necessary cultural shift to make this a reality. Participants highlighted resource constraints and the knowledge, attitudes and personal qualities of staff as a barrier to implementing person-centred care. Leadership style, the way that managers' support and value staff and the management of risk were considered important influences. Person-centred dementia care is strongly advocated by professional opinion leaders and is prescribed in policy documents. This analysis suggests that person-centred dementia care is not strongly embedded in the organisational cultures of all local providers of respite-care and short-break services. Provider organisations should be encouraged further to develop a shared culture at all levels of the organisation to ensure person-centred dementia care.