Transition of patients with recently diagnosed Dementia from inpatient to outpatient setting- a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: After being diagnosed with dementia, patients need a medical professional to empathetically address their fears and get initial questions answered. This scoping review therefore addresses how patients newly diagnosed with dementia are cared for in the general practitioner (GP) setting and how the communication between different healthcare professionals and the GP is handled. METHODS: The scoping review was conducted based on the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. After developing a search algorithm, literature searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PsychInfo, GeroLit and Cinahl using defined search criteria, such as a focus on qualitative study designs. After the removal of duplicates, title/abstract and full text screening was carried out. RESULTS: Final data extraction included 10 articles out of 12,633 records. Strategies regarding the post-acute care of newly diagnosed patients included providing clarity and comfort to the patients and giving support and information both pre- and post-diagnosis. Care efforts were focused on advanced care planning and deprescribing. Involving people with dementia and their caregivers in further care was seen as crucial to provide them with the support needed. GPs emphasised the importance of listening to concerns, as well as ensuring wishes are respected, and autonomy is maintained. All studies found communication between the GP setting and other healthcare professionals regarding post-acute care to be inadequate. Lack of information sharing, clinical notes and recommendations for the GP setting resulted in inefficient provision of support, as GPs feel limited in their ability to act. DISCUSSION: Sharing necessary information with the GP setting could promote patient-centred care for people living with dementia and facilitate appropriate and timely resource allocation and effective healthcare collaboration between the settings, for example, by defining clear care pathways and clarifying roles and expectations.

Use and uptake of technology by people with dementia and their supporters during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: This rapid review aims to identify the types of technologies used by people with dementia and their supporters during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the issues which influenced technology adoption within their usual care routines. METHODS: PubMed, PsychInfo, Scopus, and Cochrane COVID reviews were searched to identify peer-review studies published since 2020. A total of 18 studies were included and synthesised thematically. RESULTS: Of these, most were conducted in the community (n = 15) with people with dementia only (n = 11) and involved qualitative methods (n = 11). The majority (n = 12) focused on digital off-the-shelf and low-cost solutions, such as free video conferencing platforms, to access care, socialise or take part in interventions. Whilst often well-accepted and associated with positive outcomes (such as improved social connectedness), lack of digital literacy or support to use technologies, limited access to appropriate technology, individuals' physical, cognitive, or sensory difficulties, were highlighted and likely to threaten the adoption of these solutions. The quality of the evidence was mixed, neither very robust nor easily generalisable which may be attributed to the challenges of conducting research during the pandemic or the need to rapidly adapt to a new reality. CONCLUSION: While COVID-19 has fast-tracked the adoption of technology, its use is likely to continue beyond the pandemic. We need to ensure this technology can leverage dementia support and care and that people with dementia are enabled and empowered to use it.

Survey participation among general practitioners: comparison between teaching physicians and a random sample.

OBJECTIVE: Health scientists strive for a smooth recruitment of physicians for research projects like surveys. Teaching physicians are an easy to approach population that is already affiliated with a university by teaching students in their practice. How do response rates compare between a convenient online survey among teaching physicians and an elaborate postal survey in a random sample of unknown physicians? Data from the TMI-GP study on the use of memory tests in general practice were used. RESULTS: Physicians in the random sample responded to the postal survey more often than teaching physicians to the online survey (59.5% vs. 18.9%; odds ratio 7.06; 95% confidence interval 4.81-10.37; p < 0.001). Although it is unclear whether the sample, the survey mode (online vs. postal) or both account for this effect, it is noteworthy that even in such a convenience sample of known/committed physicians, an adequate response rate could not be reached without a tailored and elaborated survey technique. Responders in the two samples were comparable regarding a content-related item (use of memory tests; Χ2 (df = 1) = 3.07; p = 0.080).