Hospital-Based Health Professionals' Perceptions of Frailty in Older People.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is a high prevalence of frailty amongst older patients in hospital settings. Frailty guidelines exist but implementation to date has been challenging. Understanding health professional attitudes, knowledge, and beliefs about frailty is critical in understanding barriers and enablers to guideline implementation and the aim of this study was to understand these in rehabilitation multidisciplinary teams in hospital settings. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Twenty-three semi-structured interviews were conducted with health professionals working in multi-disciplinary teams on geriatric and rehabilitation wards in Adelaide and Sydney, Australia. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and coded by two researchers. A codebook was created and interviews re-coded and applied to the Framework Method of thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three domains were developed: diagnosing frailty, communicating about frailty, and managing frailty. Within these domains, eight themes were identified: (1) diagnosing frailty has questionable benefits, (2) clinicians don't use frailty screening tools, (3) frailty can be diagnosed on appearance and history, (4) frailty has a stigma, (5) clinicians don't use the word "frail" with patients, (6) frailty isn't always reversible, (7) there is a lack of continuity of care after acute admission, and (8) the community setting lacks resources. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Implementation of frailty guidelines will remain challenging while staff avoid using the term "frail", don't perceive benefit of using screening tools, and focus on the individual aspects of frailty rather than the syndrome holistically. Clinical champions and education about frailty identification, reversibility, management, and communication techniques may improve the implementation of frailty guidelines in hospitals.

General practice nurse perceptions of barriers and facilitators to implementation of best-practice dementia care recommendations-a qualitative interview study.

INTRODUCTION: With an aging population and a growing prevalence of people living with dementia, the demand for best-practice dementia care in general practice increases. There is an opportunity to better utilise the nurse role within the primary care team to meet this increasing demand in the provision of care for people living with dementia. However, general practice nurses have limited knowledge in the provision of best-practice care for people living with dementia and their carer(s). A number of best-practice dementia care recommendations contained in the Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines and Principles of Care for People with Dementia have been identified as highly relevant to the role of the general practice nurse. AIMS: To explore general practice nurses' perspectives on published best-practice dementia care recommendations relevant to their role and identify barriers and facilitators to their implementation into clinical practice. METHODS: Thirteen Australian general practice nurses took part in this qualitative interview study. The research questions for this study were addressed within a paradigmatic framework of social constructionism. Data were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. RESULTS: There was a high level of agreement between general practice nurses that the recommendations were important, reflected best-practice dementia care and were relevant to their role. However the recommendations were perceived as limited in their usefulness to nurses' clinical practice due to being too vague and lacking direction. Four main themes were identified describing barriers and facilitators to operationalising best-practice dementia care.: creating a comfortable environment; changing approach to care; optimising the general practice nurse role and working collaboratively. Nine sub-themes were described: physical environment; social environment; complexity of care; care planning for the family; professional role and identity, funding better dementia care, education, networking and resources; different roles, one team; and interagency communication. CONCLUSION: This study identified several factors that need addressing to support general practice nurses to integrate best-practice dementia care recommendations into daily clinical practice. The development of interventions needs to include strategies to mitigate potential barriers and enhance facilitators that they perceive impact on their delivery of best-practice care for people living with dementia and their carer(s). The knowledge gained in this study could be used to develop multi-faceted interventions informed by theoretical implementation change models to enable the general practice nurse to operationalise best-practice dementia care recommendations.

Fit-for-purpose-The bottom-up redesign of the nursing home system: The Australian Aged Care System.

Nursing homes struggle to meet the needs of their residents as they become older and frailer, live with more complex co-morbidity, and are impacted by memory impairment and dementia. Moreover, the nursing home system is overwhelmed with significantly constraining organisational and regulatory demands that stand in the way of achieving resident-focused outcomes. These issues are compounded by the perceptions of poor working environments, poor remuneration, and poor satisfaction amongst staff. The system is beyond the state of 'reform' and requires a fundamental redesign based on first organisational systems understandings: a clearly defined purpose and goal, shared values, and system-wide agreed "simple (or operating) rules". A 'fit-for-purpose' future requires a complex adaptive nursing home system characterised by seamless 'bottom-up and top-down' information flows to ensure that the necessary 'work that needs to be done' is done, and a governance structure that focuses on quality improvement and holds the system accountable for the quality of care that is provided.

Systemic failures in nursing home care-A scoping study.

Nursing homes (also referred to as residential aged care facilities, or long-term care facilities) cater for older people on a respite or long-term basis for those who are no longer able to live independently at home. Globally the sector struggles to meet societal expectations since it is torn between three competing agendas-meeting the needs of residents, meeting the demands of regulators, and meeting the financial imperatives of nursing home proprietors. Competing demands indicate that the system lacks a clear understanding of its purpose-without a clearly understood purpose any system will become dysfunctional overall and across all its levels of organisation. This scoping study aims to summarise and synthesise what is already known about the systemic function and failures in the nursing home system, and the impact this has on the wider health and aged care system. METHOD: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCHINFO, CINAHL and SCOPUS were searched using the terms: (nursing home care OR residential aged care OR nursing home) AND (organisational failure OR institutional failure OR systemic failure), limited to English language articles, including all years up to the end of February 2021. In addition, we used snowballing of article references and Google searches of the grey literature. System-focused articles were defined as those that explored how an issue at one system level impacted other system levels, or how an issue impacted at least two different agents at the same system level. RESULT: Thirty-eight articles addressed systemic issues as defined in four different contexts: United States (14), Canada (2), Australia (11) and European countries (11). Only four studies reported whole-of-system findings, whereas the remaining 34 more narrowly addressed systemic features of specific nursing home issues. The thematic analysis identified 29 key systemic issues across five system layers which consistently appear across every country/health system context. The negative outcomes of these systemic failings include: high rates of regulatory reprimands for unacceptable or unsafe practices; dissatisfaction in care experiences on the part of residents, families, and care staff-including a fear of being sent to a nursing home; and the perception amongst staff that nursing homes are not preferred places to work. CONCLUSIONS: The key issues affecting nursing home residents, and the care home sector more generally, are systemic in nature arising from two key issues: first, the lack of shared agreement on the care home system's purpose; and second, the lack of clear governance and accountability frameworks for system regulation and performance at a national level. Addressing these two key issues must be the starting point for any 'real' nursing home system redesign that can achieve a seamlessly integrated system that delivers the outcomes nursing home residents and their families expect. 'Systems thinking' is required to simultaneously improve care quality and outcomes for residents, strengthen regulation and accountability, and enable financial viability.

Medications and cognitive risk in Aboriginal primary care: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are ageing with high rates of comorbidity, yet little is known about suboptimal prescribing in this population. AIM: The prevalence of potentially suboptimal prescribing and associated risk factors were investigated among older patients attending primary care through Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHSs). METHODS: Medical records of 420 systematically selected patients aged ≥50 years attending urban, rural and remote health services were audited. Polypharmacy (≥ 5 prescribed medications), potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) as per Beers Criteria and anticholinergic burden (ACB) were estimated and associated risk factors were explored with logistic regression. RESULTS: The prevalence of polypharmacy, PIMs and ACB score ≥3 was 43%, 18% and 12% respectively. In multivariable logistic regression analyses, polypharmacy was less likely in rural (odds ratio (OR) = 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.24-0.77) compared to urban patients, and more likely in those with heart disease (OR = 2.62, 95% CI = 1.62-4.25), atrial fibrillation (OR = 4.25, 95% CI = 1.08-16.81), hypertension (OR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.34-3.44), diabetes (OR = 2.72, 95% CI = 1.69-4.39) or depression (OR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.19-3.06). PIMs were more frequent in females (OR = 1.88, 95% CI = 1.03-3.42) and less frequent in rural (OR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.19-0.85) and remote (OR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.29-1.18) patients. Factors associated with PIMs were kidney disease (OR = 2.60, 95% CI = 1.37-4.92), urinary incontinence (OR = 3.00, 95% CI = 1.02-8.83), depression (OR = 2.67, 95% CI = 1.50-4.77), heavy alcohol use (OR = 2.83, 95% CI = 1.39-5.75) and subjective cognitive concerns (OR = 2.69, 95% CI = 1.31-5.52). High ACB was less common in rural (OR = 0.10, 95% CI = 0.03-0.34) and remote (OR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.25-1.04) patients and more common in those with kidney disease (OR = 3.07, 95% CI = 1.50-6.30) or depression (OR = 3.32, 95% CI = 1.70-6.47). CONCLUSION: Associations between potentially suboptimal prescribing and depression or cognitive concerns highlight the importance of considering medication review and deprescribing for these patients.

Clinical approach to driving and the older person.

BACKGROUND: Austroads has recently introduced a new set of guidelines for driving assessment in Australia. It is therefore timely to review the clinical approach to driving assessments, which is often seen as one of the most difficult areas of general practice. OBJECTIVE: This article reviews the difficulties of driving assessment, including what measures there are to guide general practitioners (GPs), and proposes a practical approach to this issue for general practice. DISCUSSION: There is as yet no widely agreed toolkit for office-based driving assessment in general practice. On-road assessment by a trained assessor, such as an occupational therapist, remains the gold standard. GPs should consider a stepped approach to driving cessation by raising this issue well in advance of the need for licence termination, working with the patient and the family through the driving cessation itself and providing follow-up support for the patient afterwards.

Implementation of a frailty intervention in the transition from hospital to home: a realist process evaluation protocol for the FORTRESS trial.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty in Older people: Rehabilitation, Treatment, Research Examining Separate Settings (the FORTRESS study) is a multisite, hybrid type II, stepped wedge, cluster, randomised trial examining the uptake and outcomes of a frailty intervention. The intervention is based on the 2017 Asia Pacific Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Frailty and begins in the acute hospital setting and transitions to the community. The success of the intervention will require individual and organisational behaviour change within a dynamic health system. This process evaluation will examine the multiple variables at play in the context and mechanism of the frailty intervention to enhance understanding of the outcomes of the FORTRESS study and how the outcomes can be translated from the trial into broader practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The FORTRESS intervention will recruit participants from six wards in New South Wales and South Australia, Australia. Participants of the process evaluation will include trial investigators, ward-based clinicians, FORTRESS implementation clinicians, general practitioners and FORTRESS participants. The process evaluation has been designed using realist methodology and will occur in parallel to the FORTRESS trial. A mixed-method approach will be used with qualitative and quantitative data collected from interviews, questionnaires, checklists and outcome assessments. Qualitative and quantitative data will be examined for CMOCs (Context, Mechanism, Outcome Configurations) and programme theories will be developed, tested and refined. This will facilitate development of more generalisable theories to inform translation of frailty intervention within complex healthcare systems. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the FORTRESS trial, inclusive of the process evaluation, has been obtained from the Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committees reference number 2020/ETH01057. Recruitment for the FORTRESS trial uses opt-out consent. Dissemination will be via publications, conferences and social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620000760976p (FORTRESS trial).

Best-practice recommendations to inform general practice nurses in the provision of dementia care: a Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, responsibility for dementia diagnosis and management is shifting to primary care, in particular to the general practitioner (GP). It has been acknowledged that primary care nurses, working collaboratively with GPs, have a role in dementia care by utilising their unique knowledge and skills. However, there are no best-practice guidelines or care pathways to inform nurses in general practice on what best-practice dementia care comprises and how to implement this into their practice. This study identified the recommendations in the Australian guidelines for dementia management most relevant to the role of the nurse working in general practice. METHODS: Seventeen experts active in clinical practice and/or research in primary care nursing in general practice participated in an online three-round Delphi study. RESULTS: All 17 participants were female with a nursing qualification and experienced in general practice clinical nursing and/or general practice nursing research. Five recommendations were identified as the most relevant to the role of the nurse in general practice. These recommendations all contained elements of person-centred care: the delivery of individualised information, ongoing support, including the carer in decision-making, and they also align with the areas where GPs want support in dementia care provision. CONCLUSION: This novel study identified best-practice dementia care recommendations specific to nurses in general practice. These recommendations will inform a model of care for nurses in the provision of dementia care that supports GPs and better meets the needs of people living with dementia and their carer(s).

Outcome measures for Alzheimer's disease: A global inter-societal Delphi consensus.

INTRODUCTION: We aim to provide guidance on outcomes and measures for use in patients with Alzheimer's clinical syndrome. METHODS: A consensus group of 20 voting members nominated by 10 professional societies, and a non-voting chair, used a Delphi approach and modified GRADE criteria. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on priority outcomes (n = 66), measures (n = 49) and statements (n = 37) across nine domains. A number of outcomes and measurement instruments were ranked for: Cognitive abilities; Functional abilities/dependency; Behavioural and neuropsychiatric symptoms; Patient quality of life (QoL); Caregiver QoL; Healthcare and treatment-related outcomes; Medical investigations; Disease-related life events; and Global outcomes. DISCUSSION: This work provides indications on the domains and ideal pertinent measurement instruments that clinicians may wish to use to follow patients with cognitive impairment. More work is needed to develop instruments that are more feasible in the context of the constraints of clinical routine.

Frailty in older people: Rehabilitation Treatment Research Examining Separate Settings (FORTRESS): protocol for a hybrid type II stepped wedge, cluster, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Frailty in older people is associated with increased risk of falls, longer length of stay in hospital, increased risk of institutionalisation and death. Frailty can be measured using validated tools. Multi-component frailty interventions are recommended in clinical practice guidelines but are not routinely implemented in clinical practice. METHODS: The Frailty in Older people: Rehabilitation, Treatment, Research Examining Separate Settings (FORTRESS) trial is a multisite, hybrid type II, stepped wedge, cluster, randomised trial with blinded assessment and intention-to-treat analysis being conducted in Australia. The study aims to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an embedded individualised multicomponent frailty intervention (commencing in hospital and continuing in the community) on readmissions, frailty and quality of life when compared with usual care. Frail older people admitted to study wards with no significant cognitive impairment, who are expected to return home after discharge, will be eligible to participate. Participants will receive extra sessions of physiotherapy, pharmacy, and dietetics during their admission. A Community Implementation Facilitator will coordinate implementation of the frailty management strategies and primary network liaison. The primary outcome is number of days of non-elective hospital readmissions during 12 month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes include frailty status measured using the FRAIL scale; quality of life measured using the EQ-5D-5L; and time-to-event for readmission and readmission rates. The total cost of delivering the intervention will be assessed, and cost-effectiveness analyses will be conducted. Economic evaluation will include analyses for health outcomes measured in terms of the main clinical outcomes. Implementation outcomes will be collected as part of a process evaluation. Recruitment commenced in 2020 and we are aiming to recruit 732 participants over the three-year duration of the study. DISCUSSION: This study will reveal whether intervening with frail older people to address factors contributing to frailty can reduce hospital readmissions and improve frailty status and quality of life. If the FORTRESS intervention provides a clinically significant and cost-effective result, it will demonstrate an improved approach to treating frail patients, both in hospital and when they return home. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12620000760976p . ANZCTR registered 24 July 2020.

The role of quality improvement collaboratives in general practice: a qualitative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review used qualitative methodologies to examine the role of quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) in general practice. The aim was to inform implementers and participants about the utility of using or participating in QICs in general practice. METHODS: Included studies were published in English, used a QIC intervention, reported primary research, used qualitative or mixed methods, and were conducted in general practice.A Medline search between January 1995 and February 2020 was developed and extended to include Embase, CINAHL and PsycInfo databases. Articles were sought through chaining of references and grey literature searches.Qualitative outcome data were extracted using a framework analysis. Data were analysed using thematic synthesis. Articles were assessed for quality using a threshold approach based on the criteria described by Dixon-Woods. RESULTS: 15 qualitative and 18 mixed-methods studies of QICs in general practice were included. Data were grouped into four analytical themes which describe the role of a collaborative in general practice: improving the target topic, developing practices and providers, developing the health system and building quality improvement capacity. DISCUSSION: General practice collaboratives are reported to be useful for improving target topics. They can also develop knowledge and motivation in providers, build systems and team work in local practice organisations, and improve support at a system level. Collaboratives can build quality improvement capacity in the primary care system. These roles suggest that QICs are well matched to the improvement needs of general practice.General practice participants in collaboratives reported positive effects from effective peer interaction, high-quality local support, real engagement with data and well-designed training in quality improvement.Strengths of this study were an inclusive search and explicit qualitative methodology. It is possible some studies were missed. Qualitative studies of collaboratives may be affected by selection bias and confirmation bias. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD4202017512.

Development of a COVID-19 virtual community of practice in New South Wales: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In April 2020, a group of general practice leaders in NSW, Australia, established a COVID-19 virtual community of practice (VCoP) to facilitate rapid transfer and implementation of clinical guidance into practice. This research aimed to gain an understanding of the experience and effectiveness of the VCoP from leaders and members. METHOD: The study used a qualitative participatory action research methodology. A framework analysis was applied to focus group discussion, semi-structured interview and open-text written response data. RESULTS: Thirty-six participants contributed data. In addition to a positive evaluation of the effectiveness of information transfer and support, a key finding was the importance of the role of the VCoP in professional advocacy. Areas for improvement included defining measures of success. DISCUSSION: This study has reinforced the potential for VCoPs to aid health crisis responses. In future crisis applications, we recommend purposefully structuring advocacy and success measures at VCoP establishment.

Facilitated case conferences on end-of-life care for persons with advanced dementia-a qualitative study of interactions between long-term care clinicians and family members.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic uncertainty and the need for proxy decision-making owing to cognitive impairment in advanced dementia, adds complexity to end-of-life care planning within the long-term care setting. Case conferences provide a structure to facilitate difficult conversations and an opportunity for family and clinicians to engage in prospective planning, and reach agreement on goals of end-of-life care. OBJECTIVE: To explore interactions between multidisciplinary healthcare clinicians and families during facilitated case conferences on end-of-life care for residents with advanced dementia. METHODS: A qualitative approach was used. Transcripts of audio-recorded case conferences facilitated by a trained registered nurse were coded by two independent researchers and analysed inductively. Transcripts were selected from an available pool until thematic saturation was reached. Emerging themes were confirmed with the wider research group. RESULTS: Thematic saturation was reached after 25 transcripts. An overarching theme concerned the ways in which clinicians and families bridged medical and person-centred perspectives. Subthemes included: details of day-to-day care versus establishing overall goals of care; expression of emotion versus retreat from emotion; and missed opportunities versus expressed cues. Successful facilitation served to 'bridge the gap' between family and clinicians. CONCLUSION: Facilitation of case conferences for residents with advanced dementia should focus on ensuring that: clinicians do not miss opportunities to discuss end-of-life care; discussions on the minutiae of care regularly return to the resident's broader goals of care; and information on dementia and treatments provided by clinicians is integrated with advice by family members regarding the resident's premorbid values and likely preferences.

Towards Zero Suicide: need and opportunities to improve implementation of clinical elements for older adults.

OBJECTIVE: The Zero Suicide (ZS) framework is increasingly used in Australia, but without published adaptations for older people, and limited access by older people when implemented. The aim of this paper is to inform Towards Zero Suicide (TZS) implementations to benefit older adults by considering the key differences in older adults at risk of suicide according to each clinical component of the ZS framework. CONCLUSION: TZS aspires to reduce deaths by suicide for people within healthcare by refocusing interventions on suicidality rather than diagnosis alone, emphasising evidence-based practices and cultural change. For TZS to be effective for older people, it is essential to ensure practices are based upon evidence relevant to older people and to ensure ageism is effectively counteracted. Older adults have distinct patterns of help seeking and service use, accompanied by differences in risk factors, presentations, and outcomes of suicidal behaviours. Ageism affects assessment, decision-making and actions to address self-harm and suicide for older people. Immediate and longer-term actions are essential to effectively implement TZS in this population.

Towards Zero Suicide for older adults: implications of healthcare service use for implementation.

OBJECTIVE: Implementing the Towards Zero Suicide (TZS) approach to suicide prevention in older adults requires evidence-based adaptation. This paper aims to highlight important differences and opportunities in healthcare service use by older adults relevant to implementation. CONCLUSION: The TZS approach may prevent suicide in older adults, but only if implementation aligns with systemic differences in healthcare utilisation by older people. Of greatest importance in older adults are (1) most mental healthcare is delivered outside of specialist mental health services; (2) physical conditions and disability are major modifiable contributors to suicide that must be addressed within TZS; and (3) older people have very low use of Medicare-funded psychological services. Primary healthcare providers, who may be seeing older people at risk of suicide, are often neither equipped to provide expert assessment and care planning for often complex needs, nor may see this as their role. However, they are essential in providing pathways to care, which may prevent suicide. Leaders must recognise TZS for older people will usually involve multiple transitions. This requires engagement of key services with clear roles, targeted training, rapid access to specialist older persons mental health support and development of a new TZS element: the navigator.

The provision of dementia care in general practice: practice nurse perceptions of their role.

BACKGROUND: Primary care nurses can assist General Practitioner's to identify cognition concerns and support patient health self-management for those experiencing cognitive impairment or dementia. This support may lead to more appropriate care and better health outcomes for this group. Consequently, there is a need to identify the role of the primary care nurse in dementia care provision, nurse perceptions of this role and to also understand the barriers and enablers that may influence any current or potential primary care nurse role in dementia care provision. METHODS: Eight focus groups were conducted with a total of 36 primary care nurses. Data was transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. RESULTS: There was a high level of agreement between primary care nurses that they had a role in provision of dementia care. This role was largely attributed to the strong therapeutic relationship between nurses and patients. However, dementia care provision was not without its challenges, including a perceived lack of knowledge, limited resources and the hierarchical nature of general practice. Three main themes were identified: personal attributes of the primary care nurse; professional attributes of the primary care nurse role and the context of practice. Six sub-themes were identified: knowing the person; overcoming stigma; providing holistic care; knowing what to do; team culture and working in the system. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest primary care nurses have a role in dementia care provision and, there is a need to provide support for the nurse to deliver person-centred health care in the context of cognitive impairment. As the demand for good quality primary care for people living with dementia increases, the role of the primary care nurse should be considered in primary care policy discussions. The knowledge gained from this study could be useful in informing dementia training content, to provide better prompts in the health assessment and care planning templates used by primary care nurses to better identify the care needs of people with a cognitive impairment and to develop dementia care guidelines for primary care nurses.

Clinical practice guidelines and principles of care for people with dementia: a protocol for undertaking a Delphi technique to identify the recommendations relevant to primary care nurses in the delivery of person-centred dementia care.

INTRODUCTION: Nationally and internationally it is well recognised that dementia is poorly recognised and suboptimally managed in the primary care setting. There are multiple and complex reasons for this gap in care, including a lack of knowledge, high care demands and inadequate time for the general practitioner alone to manage dementia with its multiple physical, psychological and social dimensions. The primary care nurse potentially has a role in assisting the general practitioner in the provision of evidence-based dementia care. Although dementia-care guidelines for general practitioners exist, evidence on resources to support the primary care nurse in dementia care provision is scarce. The 'Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines and Principles of Care for People with Dementia' provides 109 recommendations for the diagnosis and management of dementia. This protocol describes a Delphi study to identify which of the 109 recommendations contained in these multidisciplinary guidelines are relevant to the primary care nurse in the delivery of person-centred dementia care in the general practice setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using a Delphi consensus online survey, an expert panel will grade each of the recommendations written in the 'Clinical Practice Guidelines and Principles of Care for People with Dementia' as high-to-low relevance with respect to the role of the primary care nurse in general practice. To optimise reliability of results, quality indicators will be used in the data collection and reporting of the study. Invited panel members will include Australian primary care nurses working in general practice, primary care nursing researchers and representatives of the Australian Primary Health Care Nurses Association, the peak professional body for nurses working in primary healthcare. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by The University of Newcastle Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) (H-2019-0029).Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific conferences.

Mobile memory clinic: implementing a nurse practitioner-led, collaborative dementia model of care within general practice.

The limited capacity of secondary health services to address the increasing prevalence of dementia within the community draws attention to the need for an enhanced role for nurses working collaboratively with GPs in diagnosing and coordinating post-diagnostic care for patients with dementia. This study investigated the feasibility and acceptability of a nurse practitioner-led mobile memory clinic that was embedded within general practice and targeted to caring for patients and their carers in areas of socioeconomic disadvantage with poor access to specialist health services. Over the period from mid-2013 to mid-2014, 40 GPs referred 102 patients, with the nurse practitioner conducting assessments with 77 of these patients in their homes. Overall, there was a strong interest in this model of care by general practice staff, with the assessment and care provided by the nurse practitioner evaluated as highly acceptable by both patients and their carers. Nonetheless, there are financial and structural impediments to this model of care being implemented within the current Australian health service framework, necessitating further research investigating its cost-effectiveness and efficacy.

Dementia risk reduction in practice: the knowledge, opinions and perspectives of Australian healthcare providers.

This study examined Australian primary healthcare providers' knowledge about dementia risk factors and risk reduction and their perspectives on barriers and enablers to risk reduction in practice. Primary healthcare providers were recruited through Primary Health Networks across Australia (n=51). Participants completed an online survey that consisted of fixed-responses and free-text components to assess their knowledge, attitudes and current practices relating to dementia risk factors and risk reduction techniques. The results showed that Australian primary healthcare providers have good knowledge about the modifiable risk factors for dementia; however, face several barriers to working with patients to reduce dementia risk. Commonly reported barriers included low patient motivation and healthcare system level limitations. The most commonly reported recommendations to helping primary healthcare providers to work with patients to reduce dementia risk included increasing resources and improving dementia awareness and messaging. While the results need to be interpreted in the context of the limitations of this study, we conclude that collaborative efforts between researchers, clinicians, policy makers and the media are needed to support the uptake of risk reduction activities in primary care settings.

Australian long-term care personnel's knowledge and attitudes regarding palliative care for people with advanced dementia.

This study aimed to describe Australian long-term care (LTC) personnel's knowledge and attitudes concerning palliative care for residents with advanced dementia, and explore relationships with LTC facility/personnel characteristics. An analysis was undertaken of baseline data from a cluster randomised controlled trial of facilitated family case conferencing for improving palliative care of LTC residents with advanced dementia (the 'IDEAL Study'). Participants included any LTC personnel directly involved in residents' care. Knowledge and attitudes concerning palliative care for people with advanced dementia were measured using the questionnaire on Palliative Care for Advanced Dementia. Univariate and multivariate analyses explored relationships between personnel knowledge/attitudes and facility/personnel characteristics. Of 307 personnel in the IDEAL Study, 290 (94.5%) from 19/20 LTCFs provided sufficient data for inclusion. Participants included 9 (2.8%) nurse managers, 59 (20.5%) registered nurses, 25 (8.7%) enrolled nurses, 187 (64.9%) assistants in nursing/personal care assistants and 9 (3.1%) care service employees. In multivariate analyses, a facility policy not to rotate personnel through dementia units was the only variable associated with more favourable overall personnel knowledge and attitudes. Other variables associated with favourable knowledge were a designation of nursing manager or registered or enrolled nurse, and having a preferred language of English. Other variables associated with favourable attitudes were tertiary level of education and greater experience in dementia care. Like previous international research, this study found Australian LTC personnel knowledge and attitudes regarding palliative care for people with advanced dementia to be associated with both facility and personnel characteristics. Future longitudinal research is needed to better understand the relationships between knowledge and attitudes, as well as between these attributes and quality of care.