Sociodemographic and Clinical Characteristics of People Living with Dementia and Their Associations with Unmet Healthcare Needs: Insights from the Baseline Assessment of the InDePendent Study.

Background: The healthcare needs of People living with Dementia (PlwD) (such as Alzheimer's disease) are often unmet. Information about the needs of community-dwelling PlwD and their association with sociodemographic and clinical characteristics is needed to fill the knowledge gap regarding factors influencing unmet needs among PlwD and to conduct a comprehensive needs assessment to develop tailored interventions. Objective: To describe sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the InDePendent study population with particular reference to determinants of unmet needs. Methods: We analyzed baseline data of the multi-centre cluster-randomized controlled trial (InDePendent) using descriptive statistics to describe patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and Poisson regression models to predict unmet needs, separated by sex. Data were collected personally via face-to-face interviews. Results: Most of the n = 417 participating PlwD were mild to moderately cognitively impaired, were not depressed, had an average of 10.8 diagnoses, took 6.7 medications, and had, on average, 2.4 unmet needs (62% of PlwD had at least one unmet need) measured by the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE). Low social support, a high body-mass-index, a lower education, functional impairment, and worse health status were associated with more unmet needs, regardless of sex. In women, higher unmet needs were associated with more depressive symptoms, a poor financial situation, living alone and not being recently treated by a general practitioner. In males, unmet needs increased with the number of medications taken. Conclusions: PlwD had a broad array of unmet healthcare needs, indicating primary healthcare provision improvement potentials. The results underscore the significance of early assessment of patient's clinical characteristics and unmet needs as a basis for individualized gender-sensible intervention strategies.∥ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04741932, Registered on February 5, 2021.

[Everyday Life and Mental Health of Elderly with Cognitive Impairment During the Covid-19 Pandemic]. / Lebensalltag und psychosoziale Gesundheit älterer Menschen mit kognitiven Beeinträchtigungen während der COVID-19-Pandemie.

OBJECTIVE: The aim is to analyze pandemic-related effects on everyday life and psychosocial health in the understudied vulnerable group of cognitively impaired elderly people living at home. METHODS: Structured telephone interviews in 2020 (n+=+141) and 2021 (n+=+107) were used to survey over-65s with cognitive impairment (MMSE Ø 23.4). The results from the 2021 survey presented here reflect experiences and attitudes, effects on daily life and health care, and psychosocial burdens and resources. Longitudinal analysis of selected indicators of burden is provided for n+=+66. RESULTS: Even in the face of increasing concerns and moderate impacts on everyday life and health care, overall psychosocial health is proving to be good and largely stable over time. CONCLUSION: Respondents have high levels of personal and social resources, and their coping with limitations is characterized by acceptance and willingness to adapt.

Factors Influencing Health-Related Quality of Life of Patients with Spinocerebellar Ataxia.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the progression of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and predicting factors in spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA). Such knowledge is crucial to identify modifiable factors promoting everyday life with SCA and attenuating HRQoL decline. OBJECTIVES: This study is to assess HRQoL progression and identify factors affecting SCA patients' HRQoL. METHODS: Longitudinal data (three-year follow-up) of 310 SCA patients of the European SCA3/Machado-Joseph-Disease Initiative (ESMI) (2016-2022) and 525 SCA patients (SCA1, SCA2, SCA3 or SCA6) of the EUROSCA natural history study cohort (2006-2015) were assessed. Both large cohort studies share standardized assessments of clinical measures, SARA, INAS, PHQ-9, and HRQoL (EQ-5D-3L). The association between HRQoL and clinical measures was assessed by Spearman Correlation (rs). Multivariable panel regression models were performed to evaluate the impact of patients' socio-demographics, age of onset, SCA type and body mass index (BMI), and clinical measures on HRQoL progression. RESULTS: HRQoL significantly decreased over one (- 0.014, p = 0.095), two (- 0.028, p = 0.003), and three years (- 0.032, p = 0.002). Ataxia severity and mental health strongly correlated with HRQoL (rsSARA = - 0.589; rsPHQ-9 = - 0.507). HRQoL more intensively declined in male (ß = - 0.024, p = 0.038) patients with an earlier age of onset (ß = 0.002, p = 0.058). Higher progression of ataxia severity (ß = - 0.010, p ≤ 0.001), mental health problems (ß = - 0.012, p < 0.001), and higher BMI (ß = - 0.003, p = 0.029) caused more severe decline of patients' HRQoL over time. DISCUSSION: In absence of curative treatments, stronger focus on mental health and weight influence could help clinical evaluation and accompany treatment improving SCA patients' HRQoL, especially in male patients with early disease onset.

Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Spinocerebellar Ataxia: a Validation Study of the EQ-5D-3L.

Although health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has developed into a crucial outcome parameter in clinical research, evidence of the EQ-5D-3L validation performance is lacking in patients with spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) types 1, 2, 3, and 6. The objective of this study is to assess the acceptability, validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L. For n = 842 predominantly European SCA patients of two longitudinal cohort studies, the EQ-5D-3L, PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionnaire), and ataxia-specific clinical assessments (SARA: Scale for Assessment and Rating of Ataxia; ADL: activities of daily living as part of Friedreich's Ataxia Rating Scale; INAS: Inventory of Non-Ataxia Signs) were assessed at baseline and multiple annual follow-ups. The EQ-5D-3L was evaluated regarding acceptability, distribution properties, convergent and known-groups validity, test-retest reliability, and effect size measures to analyze health changes. The non-item response was low (EQ-5D-3L index: 0.8%; EQ-VAS: 3.4%). Ceiling effects occurred in 9.9% (EQ-5D-3L) and 3.0% (EQ-VAS) with a mean EQ-5D-3L index of 0.65 ± 0.21. In total, convergent validity showed moderate to strong Spearman's rho (rs > 0.3) coefficients comparing EQ-5D-3L and EQ-VAS with PHQ-9, SARA, ADL, and INAS. EQ-5D-3L could discriminate between groups of age, SARA, ADL, and INAS. Intra-class correlation coefficients (EQ-5D-3LICC: 0.95/EQ-VASICC: 0.88) and Kappa statistics (range 0.44 to 0.93 for EQ-5D-3L items) indicated tolerable reliability. EQ-5D-3L shows small (effect size < 0.3) to moderate (effect size 0.3-0.59) health changes regarding ataxia severity. The analysis confirms an acceptable, reliable, valid, and responsive recommended EQ-5D-3L in SCA patients, measuring the HRQoL adequately, besides well-established clinical instruments.

Fluctuations of health states in dementia diseases and their impact on the assessment of health today using the EQ-5D-5L: Protocol of a mixed-methods study.

Introduction: The EQ-5D is a widely used health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument. The recall period "today" may miss out on recurrent health fluctuations often observed in people with dementia (PlwD). Thus, this study aims to assess the frequency of health fluctuations, affected HRQoL dimensions and the impact of the health fluctuations on the assessment of health today using the EQ-5D-5L. Methods and analysis: This mixed-methods study will base on n=50 patient and caregiver dyads and four main study phases: (1) Baseline assessment of patients' socio-demographic and clinical characteristics; (2) caregivers self-completion of a daily diary for 14 days, documenting patient's today's health compared to yesterday, the affected HRQoL dimensions, and events that could have caused the fluctuations; (3) administration of the EQ-5D-5L as self- and proxy-rating at baseline, day seven and day 14; (4) interviewing caregivers on patient's health fluctuation, the consideration of past fluctuations in the assessment of health today using the EQ-5D-5L, and the appropriateness of recall periods to capture health fluctuations on day 14. Qualitative semi-structured interview data will be analyzed thematically. Quantitative analyses will be used to describe the frequency and intensity of health fluctuations, affected dimensions, and the association between health fluctuation and its consideration in the assessment of health today. Discussion: This study aims to reveal insights into the health fluctuation in dementia, the affected dimensions, and underlying health events, as well as whether individuals adhere to the recall period of health today using the EQ-5D-5L. This study will also provide information about more appropriate recall periods that could better capture health fluctuations. Trial registration: This study is registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00027956).

Design and implementation of the participatory German network for translational dementia care research (TaNDem): A mixed-method study on the perspectives of healthcare providers and dementia researchers in dementia care research.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is a lack of interaction between research and healthcare practice. As a result, research findings reach healthcare practice only late, and topics relevant to practice are often not known in research. Involving people living with dementia (PlwD), their relatives and healthcare providers in dementia care research can accelerate this process. For inclusion, firm and reliable structures are needed, which are to be established with the help of the Translational Network for Dementia Care Research in Germany. However, there is only limited knowledge about the priorities, expectations and conditions of stakeholders (healthcare providers and dementia researchers) for such cooperation within a network. OBJECTIVES: The aim is to gather stakeholders' views on (i) future research topics to be addressed within the dementia care research network, (ii) the nature of collaboration within the network and (iii) the facilitating and hindering factors for establishing such a network. METHODS: Within an exploratory sequential mixed-method study, we interviewed 87 stakeholders within eleven semistructured focus group interviews. The interviews were transcribed, pseudonymized and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The qualitative data were analyzed with MAXQDA. Based on the qualitative results found in the focus group interviews, a supplementary online questionnaire was developed to prioritise and rank these findings afterwards. RESULTS: Stakeholders prioritized a comprehensible transfer of research results into practice, increased involvement of PlwD and their relatives (additionally marginalized groups such as people with a migrant background) in research and exchange between researchers. Cooperation should preferably occur in a regional context with local contacts, and the latest research results should be made available via an online database. The stakeholders' time, finances and human resources should be considered. CONCLUSION: Stakeholders have partly similar preferences and goals for cooperation and involvement, emphasizing that such interaction in a network offers the possibility of long-term, effective collaboration and added value for practice and research. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: For this study, dementia healthcare providers and dementia care researchers were asked about their perspectives. Their involvement is further elucidated in the manuscript text.

Impact of low-value medications on quality of life, hospitalization and costs - A longitudinal analysis of patients living with dementia.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to analyze the impact of low-value medications (Lvm), that is, medications unlikely to benefit patients but to cause harm, on patient-centered outcomes over 24 months. METHODS: This longitudinal analysis was based on baseline, 12 and 24 months follow-up data of 352 patients with dementia. The impact of Lvm on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), hospitalizations, and health care costs were assessed using multiple panel-specific regression models. RESULTS: Over 24 months, 182 patients (52%) received Lvm at least once and 56 (16%) continuously. Lvm significantly increased the risk of hospitalization by 49% (odds ratio, confidence interval [CI] 95% 1.06-2.09; p = 0.022), increased health care costs by €6810 (CI 95% -707€-14,27€; p = 0.076), and reduced patients' HRQoL (b = -1.55; CI 95% -2.76 to -0.35; p = 0.011). DISCUSSION: More than every second patient received Lvm, negatively impacting patient-reported HRQoL, hospitalizations, and costs. Innovative approaches are needed to encourage prescribers to avoid and replace Lvm in dementia care. HIGHLIGHTS: Over 24 months, more than every second patient received low-value medications (Lvm). Lvm negatively impact physical, psychological, and financial outcomes. Appropriate measures are needed to change prescription behaviors.

Do They Align? Congruence Between Patient Preferences of People Living with Cognitive Impairments and Physicians' Judgements for Person-Centered Care: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Study.

BACKGROUND: Person-centered care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. Among people living with cognitive impairments (PlwCI), evidence on quantitative, choice-based preferences, which allow to quantify, weigh, and rank care elements, is limited. Furthermore, data on the congruence of patient preferences with physicians' judgements for PCC are missing. Such information is expected to support the implementation of PCC; state-of-the-art medical care aligned with patients' preferences. OBJECTIVE: To elicit patient preferences and physicians' judgements for PCC and their congruence. METHODS: Data from the mixed-methods PreDemCare study, including a cross-sectional, paper-and-pencil, interviewer-assisted analytic hierarchy process (AHP) survey conducted with n = 50 community-dwelling PlwCI and n = 25 physicians. Individual AHP weights (preferences/judgements) were calculated with the principal eigenvector method and aggregated per group by aggregation of individual priorities mode. Individual consistency ratios (CRs) were calculated and aggregated per group. Group differences in preferences/judgements were investigated descriptively by means and standard deviations (SDs) of AHP weights, resulting ranks, and boxplots. Additionally, differences between groups were investigated with independent paired t-test/Mann Whitney U-test. Sensitivity of AHP results was tested by inclusion/exclusion of inconsistent respondents, with an accepted threshold at CR≤0.3 for patients, and CR≤0.2 for physicians, due to better cognitive fitness of the latter group. RESULTS: Patient preferences and physicians' judgements did not differ significantly, except for the criterion Memory Exercises (AHP weights (mean (SD)): 0.135 (0.066) versus 0.099 (0.068), p = 0.01). We did not see rank-reversals of criteria after exclusion of inconsistent participants. Mean CR for patients at the criteria level was 0.261, and 0.181 for physicians. CONCLUSION: Physicians' judgements in our setting aligned well with patients' preferences. Our findings may be used to guide the implementation of preference-based PCC.

Translation of Collaborative Dementia Care Management into Different Healthcare Settings: Study Protocol for a Multicenter Implementation Trial (DCM:IMPact).

Background: Collaborative care models for people living with dementia (PwD) have been developed and evaluated, demonstrating safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness. However, these studies are based on heterogeneous study populations and primary care settings, limiting the generalizability of the results. Therefore, this study aims to implement and evaluate collaborative care across various healthcare settings and patient populations. Objective: To describe the study design of this multicenter implementation trial. Methods: This single-arm, multicenter, longitudinal implementation study will be conducted in five different healthcare settings, including 1) physicians' networks, 2) dementia networks, 3) counselling centers, 4) hospitals, and 5) ambulatory care services. Eligibility criteria are: having a formal dementia diagnosis or having been screened positive for dementia and living community-dwelling. The staff of each healthcare setting identifies patients, informs them about the study, and invites them to participate. Participants will receive a baseline assessment followed by collaborative individualized dementia care management, comprising proven safe, effective, and cost-effective modules. Over six months, specially-qualified nurses will assess patients' unmet needs, transfer them to individualized care plans, and address them, cooperating with various healthcare providers. A follow-up assessment is conducted six months after baseline. Approximately 60-100 PwD per setting per year are expected to participate. Differences across settings will be assessed regarding acceptability, demand, implementation success and barriers, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness. Results: We expect that acceptability, demand, implementation success and barriers, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness will vary by patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and unmet needs in each setting. Conclusion: The results will provide evidence highlighting differences in the implementation of collaborative care in various healthcare settings and demonstrating the settings with the highest need, best conditions for a successful implementation, and highest (cost-)effectiveness, as well as the population group that benefits most from collaborative care. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00025074. Registered 16 April 2021-retrospectively registered.

Comparing the psychometric properties of EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L proxy ratings by informal caregivers and a health professional for people with dementia.

BACKGROUND: Assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among persons with dementia poses several challenges due to cognitive decline and limited perception. As a result, proxy ratings by family members or health professionals are used. The EQ-5D is the most commonly used generic and preference-based HRQoL instrument. Methodological drawbacks of the three-level version (EQ-5D-3L) prompted the development of the five-level version (EQ-5D-5L) by expanding the range in the domains. However, no comparison of the psychometric properties of both versions and different proxy ratings exist so far. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L by application of different proxy ratings in dementia. METHODS: The EQ-5D-3L and -5L were completed by n = 52 family caregivers and one care manager at baseline and three and six months later. In total, 106 caregiver and 133 care manager proxy ratings were completed. The EQ-5D-3L and 5L were evaluated in terms of acceptability (missing values), agreement, ceiling effects, redistribution properties and inconsistency, and informativity (Shannon, H', and Shannon Evenness, J', indices) as well as convergent and discriminative validity. RESULTS: Mean proxy index scores were higher for the 5L than the 3L. Missing values occurred less frequently in both proxy ratings and versions (< 1%). Agreement between both measures was high but higher in caregiver than care-manager ratings (ICC 0.885 vs. 0.840). The relative ceiling effect decreased from the 3L to the 5L, more intensively in the care-manager (75%) than the caregiver rating (56%). Inconsistency between both versions was low. Informativity increased from the 3L to the 5L version, nearly equally in both proxy ratings. The 5L also demonstrated a better discriminative ability and convergent validity than the 3L, especially in the caregiver rating. CONCLUSION: Compared to the EQ-5D-3L, the EQ-5D-5L had higher feasibility and acceptability and was slightly superior by a reduction of ceiling effects and an improvement in informativity, discriminative ability and convergent validity. Proxy ratings by informal caregivers overall demonstrated better psychometric properties than professional care-manager ratings.

Development of a Quantitative Preference Instrument for Person-Centered Dementia Care-Stage 2: Insights from a Formative Qualitative Study to Design and Pretest a Dementia-Friendly Analytic Hierarchy Process Survey.

Person-centered care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. An analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is one approach to quantify, weigh and rank patient preferences suitable for People living with Dementia (PlwD), due to simple pairwise comparisons of individual criteria from a complex decision problem. The objective of the present study was to design and pretest a dementia-friendly AHP survey. Methods: Two expert panels consisting of n = 4 Dementia Care Managers and n = 4 physicians to ensure content-validity, and "thinking-aloud" interviews with n = 11 PlwD and n = 3 family caregivers to ensure the face validity of the AHP survey. Following a semi-structured interview guide, PlwD were asked to assess appropriateness and comprehensibility. Data, field notes and partial interview transcripts were analyzed with a constant comparative approach, and feedback was incorporated continuously until PlwD had no further comments or struggles with survey completion. Consistency ratios (CRs) were calculated with Microsoft® Excel and ExpertChoice Comparion®. Results: Three main categories with sub-categories emerged: (1) Content: clear task introduction, (sub)criteria description, criteria homogeneity, (sub)criteria appropriateness, retest questions and sociodemography for heterogeneity; (2) Format: survey structure, pairwise comparison sequence, survey length, graphical design (incl. AHP scale), survey procedure explanation, survey assistance and response perspective; and (3) Layout: easy wording, short sentences and visual aids. Individual CRs ranged from 0.08 to 0.859, and the consolidated CR was 0.37 (0.038). Conclusions: Our formative qualitative study provides initial data for the design of a dementia-friendly AHP survey. Consideration of our findings may contribute to face and content validity in future quantitative preference research in dementia.

Elicitation of quantitative, choice-based preferences for Person-Centered Care among People living with Dementia in comparison to physicians' judgements in Germany: study protocol for the mixed-methods PreDemCare-study.

BACKGROUND: Person-Centered-Care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. Among People-living-with-Dementia (PlwD) data on quantitative, choice-based preferences, which would allow to quantify, weigh and rank patient-relevant elements of dementia-care, and identify most/least preferred choices, are limited. The Analytic-Hierarchy-Process (AHP) may be one approach to elicit quantitative, choice-based preferences with PlwD, due to simple pairwise comparisons of individual criteria from a complex decision-problem, e.g. health care decisions. Furthermore, data on congruence of patient preferences with physicians' judgements for PCC are missing. If patient preferences and physicians' judgements differ, provision of PCC becomes unlikely. An understanding of patient preferences compared to physician's judgements will support the implementation of truly PCC, i.e. state of the art dementia-care aligned with patient preferences. METHODS: This mixed-methods-study will be based on the results from a previous systematic review and conducted in three phases: (I) literature-based key intervention-categories of PCC will be investigated during qualitative interviews with Dementia-Care-Managers (DCMs) and PlwD to identify actually patient-relevant (sub) criteria of PCC; (II) based on findings from phase I, an AHP-survey will be designed and pre-tested for face- and content-validity, and consistency during face-to-face "thinking-aloud"-interviews with PlwD and two expert panels (DCMs and physicians); (III) the developed survey will elicit patient preferences and physicians' judgements for PCC. To assess individual importance weights for (sub) criteria in both groups, the Principal-Eigenvector-Method will be applied. Weights will be aggregated per group by Aggregation-of-Individual-Priorities-mode. Descriptive and interferential statistical analyses will be conducted to assess congruence of importance-weights between groups. Subgroup-analyses shall investigate participant-heterogeneities, sensitivity of AHP-results shall be tested by inclusion/exclusion of inconsistent respondents. DISCUSSION: Little research is published on quantitative, choice-based preferences in dementia care. We expect that (1) PlwD have preferences and can express these, (2) that the AHP is a suitable technique to elicit quantitative, choice-based preferences among PlwD, and (3) to identify a divergence between patient preferences and physicians' judgements for PCC. With the help of the AHP-technique, which supports systematic decision-making including multiple criteria, it may be possible to involve PlwD in future care decisions (patient participation) and ensure implementation of truly Person-Centered-Dementia-Care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Approval of the study was granted by the Ethics Committee at the University Medicine Greifswald the 09Apr2021 (Reg.-Nr.: BB 018-21, BB 018-21a, BB 018-21b).

Development of a Quantitative Instrument to Elicit Patient Preferences for Person-Centered Dementia Care Stage 1: A Formative Qualitative Study to Identify Patient Relevant Criteria for Experimental Design of an Analytic Hierarchy Process.

Background: Person-centered care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. This formative qualitative study aimed to identify (sub)criteria of PCC for the design of a quantitative, choice-based instrument to elicit patient preferences for person-centered dementia care. Method: Interviews were conducted with n = 2 dementia care managers, n = 10 People living with Dementia (PlwD), and n = 3 caregivers (CGs), which followed a semi-structured interview guide including a card game with PCC criteria identified from the literature. Criteria cards were shown to explore the PlwD's conception. PlwD were asked to rank the cards to identify patient-relevant criteria of PCC. Audios were verbatim-transcribed and analyzed with qualitative content analysis. Card game results were coded on a 10-point-scale, and sums and means for criteria were calculated. Results: Six criteria with two sub-criteria emerged from the analysis; social relationships (indirect contact, direct contact), cognitive training (passive, active), organization of care (decentralized structures and no shared decision making, centralized structures and shared decision making), assistance with daily activities (professional, family member), characteristics of care professionals (empathy, education and work experience) and physical activities (alone, group). Dementia-sensitive wording and balance between comprehensibility vs. completeness of the (sub)criteria emerged as additional themes. Conclusions: Our formative study provides initial data about patient-relevant criteria of PCC to design a quantitative patient preference instrument. Future research may want to consider the balance between (sub)criteria comprehensibility vs. completeness.

Tasks and Activities of an Effective Collaborative Dementia Care Management Program in German Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated the efficiency of collaborative dementia care, which aims to improve post-diagnostic support. However, tasks carried out of such models are currently unknown, hindering its implementation. OBJECTIVE: To describe tasks of a collaborative model of dementia care, analyze the association between specific task subgroups and number of tasks with patients' and caregivers' characteristics and the impact of specific tasks on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: The analysis was based on 183 persons with dementia (PwD) who received dementia care management conducted by dementia-specific qualified nurses. A standardized, computer-assisted assessment was used to identify patients' and caregivers' unmet needs. Tasks carried out to address unmet needs were documented, categorized, and descriptively analyzed. We used multivariate regression models to identify socio-demographic and clinical factors associated with a specific subgroup of tasks or a higher number of tasks. RESULTS: On average, 20.5 tasks were carried out per dyad (PwD and caregiver). 41% of tasks were categorized to cooperation with other healthcare providers, 39% to nursing care, and 19% to social support. Lower HRQoL and higher age, cognitive impairment, deficits in daily living activities, and depressive symptoms were significantly associated with a higher number of tasks. A higher number of cooperation tasks were associated with a higher gain in HRQoL. CONCLUSION: Patients' characteristics and HRQoL significantly determine the intensity of collaborative care interventions. Variability of the intensity should be considered in developing future studies and in the implementation into routine care. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT01401582.

Advanced nursing practice and interprofessional dementia care (InDePendent): study protocol for a multi-center, cluster-randomized, controlled, interventional trial.

BACKGROUND: A redistribution of tasks between specialized nurses and primary care physicians, i.e., models of advanced nursing practice, has the potential to improve the treatment and care of the growing number of people with dementia (PwD). Especially in rural areas with limited access to primary care physicians and specialists, these models might improve PwD's quality of life and well-being. However, such care models are not available in Germany in regular healthcare. This study examines the acceptance, safety, efficacy, and health economic efficiency of an advanced nursing practice model for PwD in the primary care setting in Germany. METHODS: InDePendent is a two-arm, multi-center, cluster-randomized controlled intervention study. Inclusion criteria are age ≥70 years, cognitively impaired (DemTect ≤8) or formally diagnosed with dementia, and living in the own home. Patients will be recruited by general practitioners or specialists. Randomization is carried out at the physicians' level in a ratio of 1:2 (intervention vs. waiting-control group). After study inclusion, all participants will receive a baseline assessment and a follow-up assessment after 6 months. Patients of the intervention group will receive advanced dementia care management for 6 months, carried out by specialized nurses, who will conduct certain tasks, usually carried out by primary care physicians. This includes a standardized assessment of the patients' unmet needs, the generation and implementation of an individualized care plan to address the patients' needs in close coordination with the GP. PwD in the waiting-control group will receive routine care for 6 months and subsequently become part of the intervention group. The primary outcome is the number of unmet needs after 6 months measured by the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE). The primary analysis after 6 months is carried out using multilevel models and will be based on the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, caregiver burden, acceptance, and cost-effectiveness. In total, n=465 participants are needed to assess significant differences in the number of unmet needs between the intervention and control groups. DISCUSSION: The study will provide evidence about the acceptance, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of an innovative interprofessional concept based on advanced nursing care. Results will contribute to the implementation of such models in the German healthcare system. The goal is to improve the current treatment and care situation for PwD and their caregivers and to expand nursing roles. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04741932 . Registered on 2 February 2021.

Associations Between Low-Value Medication in Dementia and Healthcare Costs.

BACKGROUND: Low-value medications (Lvm) provide little or no benefit to patients, may be harmful, and waste healthcare resources and costs. Although evidence from the literature indicates that Lvm is highly prevalent in dementia, evidence about the financial consequences of Lvm in dementia is limited. This study analyzed the association between receiving Lvm and healthcare costs from a public payers' perspective. METHODS: This analysis is based on data of 516 community-dwelling people living with dementia (PwD). Fourteen Lvm were extracted from dementia-specific guidelines, the German equivalent of the Choosing Wisely campaign, and the PRISCUS list. Healthcare utilization was retrospectively assessed via face-to-face interviews with caregivers and monetarized by standardized unit costs. Associations between Lvm and healthcare costs were analyzed using multiple linear regression models. RESULTS: Every third patient (n = 159, 31%) received Lvm. Low-value antiphlogistics, analgesics, anti-dementia drugs, sedatives and hypnotics, and antidepressants alone accounted for 77% of prescribed Lvm. PwD who received Lvm were significantly less cognitively impaired than those not receiving Lvm. Receiving Lvm was associated with higher medical care costs (b = 2959 €; 95% CI 1136-4783; p = 0.001), particularly due to higher hospitalization (b = 1911 €; 95% CI 376-3443; p = 0.015) and medication costs (b = 905 €; 95% CI 454-1357; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Lvm were prevalent, more likely occurring in the early stages of dementia, and cause financial harm for payers due to higher direct medical care costs. Further research is required to derive measures to prevent cost-driving Lvm in primary care, that is, implementing deprescribing interventions and moving health expenditures towards higher value resource use.

[Qualification requirements for the re-delegation of medical activities to nursing professionals (with extended competencies)]. / Qualifikationsbedarf für Pflegefachpersonen (mit erweiterten Kompetenzen) bei einer Aufgabenneuverteilung ärztlicher Tätigkeiten.

BACKGROUND: For many years, the redistribution of tasks and thus a transfer of medical activities to nursing professionals with extended competencies has been discussed in Germany and is currently being regulated by the federal government. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to record the opinions of GPs and nurses on the qualification requirements for possible delegable and substitutable medical activities to nurses using the example of outpatient dementia care. METHOD: In the context of a quantitative survey, the qualification requirements for the delegation of 30 different activities to nurses were collected from primary care physicians and nurses. A total of 1,634 questionnaires was distributed. The response rate was 28.0 % (primary care physicians: n=225, and nursing specialists: n=232). The analyses were carried out descriptively using SPSS software (version 25, IBM Corp., 2017). RESULTS: 45.1% of the respondents said they needed additional qualification prior to such a task transfer. This need primarily relates to further training (37.3%). Those seeking a university education (36.2%), will either pursue a Bachelor's (15.6%) or a Master's degree (20.6%) to obtain the necessary qualification. CONCLUSION: The results of this study can help define the activity profiles of academically qualified nursing professionals and inform the development of curricula for their university education. Furthermore, they will support the further development of the legal framework.

[Transfer of Physicians' Tasks to Nurses in the Care of People with Dementia]. / Aufgabenübertragung ärztlicher Tätigkeiten in der Versorgung von Menschen mit Demenz auf Pflegefachpersonen in Substitution und Delegation.

THE AIM OF THE STUDY: A transfer of medical activities to nurses and thus the redistribution of tasks has been discussed for almost 15 years. A legal base for model projects has been enacted. However, clearly defined tasks for substitution are still lacking. The aim of this study was to solicit opinions of general practitioners, nurses, people with dementia (PwD) and their relatives about the possibility of a large number of specific General practitioner (GP) tasks being performed by nurses in outpatient dementia care. METHODS: A mixed-methods study with a sequential in-depth design was conducted. The analysis presented here refers to the quantitative survey of the four participant groups. 865 participants were asked about the acceptance of substitution of assessments, primary and follow-up prescriptions, health monitoring measures and other activities currently performed by physicians. RESULTS: Across all groups of subjects, the highest level of approval for substitution was achieved for the assessment of mobility restrictions, everyday competencies, nutritional abnormalities, prescription of transportation, nursing aids, home nursing services and drawing of blood samples. Among PwD and relatives, the level of acceptance for substitution was very high. 88% of the PwD and relatives indicated that many activities can be substituted while the general practitioner remained their first point of contact. More GPs (63.2%) than nurses (56.7%) would accept the substitution. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that a large number of GPs, nurses, patients and their relatives welcome substitution. However, PwD and relatives have a significantly more positive attitude towards substitution.

[Task sharing in outpatient dementia care - Focus groups with GPs and nurses]. / Aufgabenteilung in der ambulanten Versorgung von Menschen mit Demenz.

Task sharing in outpatient dementia care - Focus groups with GPs and nurses Abstract. Background: Caring for people with dementia (PWD) is challenging for the health system and family carers and can only be managed through interprofessional medical and nursing care. AIM: The AHeaD study investigated attitudes of general practitioners (GPs) and nurses towards the transfer of activities previously performed by GPs to advanced nurses in the outpatient care of PWDs. METHODS: In four focus group discussions with 10 GPs and 13 nurses, qualitative content analysis was used to investigate attitudes towards the transfer of certain tasks and to identify opportunities and barriers to their introduction. RESULTS: GPs primarily preferred the transfer of nursing activities such as blood sampling, assessments, their monitoring or follow-up prescriptions for nursing aids. "Classical" medical tasks (e. g. diagnosis of diseases, initial prescription of medication) are still seen in the hands of GPs. Nurses demanded more appreciation and recognition for the relationship between GPs and nurse and criticised the lack of trust and insufficient communication. Both sides pointed to tight time budgets that were hardly oriented towards the actual needs of the PWD. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a redistribution of tasks requires the creation of legal and financial framework conditions, time resources, concrete task descriptions as well as a stronger cooperation between the professional groups involved. Innovative concepts could contribute to the sensible use of the resources GP and nurses and strengthen the care of PWDs.

Key Intervention Categories to Provide Person-Centered Dementia Care: A Systematic Review of Person-Centered Interventions.

BACKGROUND: Person-centered care (PCC) is an important concept in many countries' national guidelines and dementia plans. Key intervention categories, i.e., a taxonomy of person-centered (PC)-interventions, to provide person-centered dementia care, are difficult to identify from literature. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to identify and categorize published PC-interventions into key intervention categories to guide the provision of person-centered dementia care. METHODS: Conduct of this systematic review followed Cochrane guidelines. A search of the dimensions 'Dementia', 'Person-Centered Care', and 'Intervention' combined was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Study selection was based on 2-stage screening against eligibility criteria, limited to controlled study designs. Information about interventions and outcomes was extracted into an "Effects Table". The identified PC-interventions were categorized in intervention categories to provide person-centered dementia care. RESULTS: Searches identified 1,806 records. 19 studies were included. These covered a range of psychosocial interventions, oftentimes multi-component interventions, which followed heterogeneous approaches. Studies were conducted in long-term care/hospital settings. Nine key intervention categories were identified: social contact, physical activities, cognitive training, sensory enhancement, daily living assistance, life history oriented emotional support, training and support for professional caregivers, environmental adjustments, and care organization. CONCLUSION: Our findings provide a current overview of published PC-interventions in dementia, which followed heterogeneous approaches under the PCC-concept. The heterogeneity made it challenging to identify a well-defined concept of PCC and common key intervention categories. An effectiveness-evaluation of "PC" - including "relationship-centered"-interventions may be valuable, to assess whether an explicit focus on relationships around PCC-interventions yields an added benefit. PROSPERO-ID: CRD42021225084.