Improving the mix of institutional and community care for older people with dementia: an application of the balance of care approach in eight European countries

© 2015 Taylor & Francis. Objectives: To examine whether the mix of community and institutional long-term care (ILTC) for people with dementia (PwD) in Europe could be improved; assess the economic consequences of providing alternative services for particular groups of ILTC entrants and explore the transnational application of the ‘Balance of Care’ (BoC) approach. Method: A BoC study was undertaken in Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and the UK as part of the RightTimePlaceCare project. Drawing on information about 2014 PwD on the margins of ILTC admission, this strategic planning framework identified people whose needs could be met in more than one setting, and compared the relative costs of the possible alternatives. Results: The findings suggest a noteworthy minority of ILTC entrants could be more appropriately supported in the community if enhanced services were available. This would not necessarily require innovative services, but more standard care (including personal and day care), assuming quality was ensured. Potential cost savings were identified in all countries, but community care was not always cheaper than ILTC and the ability to release resources varied between nations. Conclusions: This is believed to be the first transnational application of the BoC approach, and demonstrates its potential to provide a consistent approach to planning across different health and social care systems. Better comparative information is needed on the number of ILTC entrants with dementia, unit costs and outcomes. Nevertheless, the findings offer important evidence on the appropriateness of current provision, and the opportunity to learn from different countries' experience

Inter-country exploration of factors associated with admission to long-term institutional dementia care: evidence from the RightTimePlaceCare study

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Aim: To explore inter-country variation of factors associated with institutionalization of people with dementia. Background: There is an urgent need for evidence on whether factors associated with admission to institutional dementia care are applicable across healthcare systems, as increasing evidence suggests that these factors could be country-specific. Design: A prospective cohort study. Method: Primary data were collected in eight European countries, at baseline and after 3 months follow-up (November 2010-April 2012). The sample included 2014 dyads of people with dementia and their informal caregivers; 791 patients were recently institutionalized, 1223 patients lived at home and were at risk of institutionalization. Associations between care setting (institution vs. home) and factors shown to influence institutionalization (e.g. cognition, independence in activities of daily life, behaviour) were studied. Results: Considerable differences were found between the eight countries in characteristics of people with dementia who had been recently admitted to ILTC. However, caregiver burden appeared the most consistent factor associated with institutionalization in all analyses. Indications for the importance of independence in activities of daily life were found as well, although country differences may be more prominent for this factor. Conclusion: Evidence was found for two common factors, crucial in the process of institutionalization across countries: caregiver burden and independency in activities of daily life. However, this study also suggests that admission to institutional dementia care is context-specific, as wide variation exists in factors associated with institutionalization across countries. Tailored best-practice strategies are needed to reflect variations in response to these needs

Most appropriate placement for people with dementia: individual experts' vs. expert groups' decisions in eight European countries

© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Aims: To investigate the extent of variability in individuals' and multidisciplinary groups' decisions about the most appropriate setting in which to support people with dementia in different European countries. Background: Professionals' views of appropriate care depend on care systems, cultural background and professional discipline. It is not known to what extent decisions made by individual experts and multidisciplinary groups coincide. Design: A modified nominal group approach was employed in eight countries (Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the UK) as part of the RightTimePlaceCare Project. Methods: Detailed vignettes about 14 typical case types of people with dementia were presented to experts in dementia care (n = 161) during November and December 2012. First, experts recorded their personal judgements about the most appropriate settings (home care, assisted living, care home, nursing home) in which to support each of the depicted individuals. Second, participants worked in small groups to reach joint decisions for the same vignettes. Results: Considerable variation was seen in individuals' recommendations for more than half the case types. Cognitive impairment, functional dependency, living situation and caregiver burden did not differentiate between case types generating high and low degrees of consensus. Group-based decisions were more consistent, but country-specific patterns remained. Conclusions: A multidisciplinary approach would standardize the decisions made about the care needed by people with dementia on the cusp of care home admission. The results suggest that certain individuals could be appropriately diverted from care home entry if suitable community services were available

Changes in caregiver burden and health-related quality of life of informal caregivers of older people with Dementia: evidence from the European RightTimePlaceCare prospective cohort study

© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Aims: To describe differences in caregiver burden and health-related quality of life of informal caregivers of people with dementia in eight European countries and assess changes after transition from home to institutional long-term care. Background: Country differences in the experience of burden and health-related quality of life are rarely described. Design: Prospective cohort study. Methods: Data on burden and health-related quality of life were collected at baseline (conducted between November 2010-April 2012) and follow-up (after 3 months) using face-to-face interviews. Two groups of informal caregivers included those: (1) of people with dementia recently admitted to institutional long-term care facilities; and those (2) of people with dementia receiving home care. Statistical analyses focused on descriptive comparisons between groups and countries. Results: Informal caregivers of about 2014 were interviewed. Informal caregivers of people with dementia at home experienced more burden compared with informal caregivers of recently institutionalised people with dementia. Almost no differences in health-related quality of life were found between groups. Large differences between countries on outcomes were found. Informal caregivers of people with dementia who made the transition to an institutional long-term care facility experienced a statistically significant decrease in burden and psychological distress at follow-up. Conclusion: Cross-country differences may be related to differences in health and social care systems. Taking this into account, informal caregiver interventions need to be tailored to (country specific) contexts and (individual) needs. Findings highlight the positive impact of admission to institutional long-term care on informal caregiver well-being

Older persons with dementia at risk for institutionalization in eight European countries: a cross-sectional study on the perceptions of informal caregivers and healthcare professionals

© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Aims: To explore the perceptions of informal caregivers and healthcare professionals regarding potential reasons for the institutionalization of older persons with dementia in eight European countries. Background: Healthcare professionals may have an important role in facilitating informal caregivers' decision-making regarding institutionalization. Little is known about the perceptions of informal caregivers and healthcare professionals prior to institutionalization. Design: Cross-sectional survey in eight European countries (November 2010-January 2012). Methods: Healthcare professionals reported why they clinically judged persons with dementia at risk for institutionalization. Informal caregivers reported potential reasons from their perspectives. Answers were openly coded and categorized. Variation between informal caregivers and healthcare professionals was investigated (agreement on at least one potential reason per case/proportion of maximum attainable kappa). Results: Judgements of healthcare professionals and informal caregivers on 1160 persons with dementia were included. A total of 22 categories emerged. Approximately 90% of informal caregivers reported potential reasons. In 41% of the cases, informal caregivers and healthcare professionals agreed on at least one reason. Discrepancy was high for potential reasons related to caregiver burden. For the most frequent categories (caregiver burden, caregiver unable to provide care, neuropsychiatric symptoms, overall deterioration, care dependency), 24-41% of the attainable kappa was achieved. Differences between countries emerged indicating more favourable agreement in Finland, Sweden and Estonia and lowest agreement in England and Spain. Conclusion: Agreement between healthcare professionals and informal caregivers on potential reasons for institutionalization was low-to-moderate. Healthcare professionals are challenged to develop a detailed understanding of the perspectives and perceived burden of informal caregivers

Predicting institutional long-term care admission in dementia: A mixed-methods study of informal caregivers' reports

© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Aim: To investigate agreement between: (1) expected reasons and actual reasons for admission of people with dementia according to informal caregivers; (2) scores on measurement instruments prior to admission and the actual reasons for admission according to informal caregivers. Background: Timely admission of people with dementia is a crucial issue. Information is highly warranted on whether informal caregivers are capable of prior identification of causes of admission and, can thus be considered a reliable prospective source on causes of admission. Design: A cohort study among informal caregivers of people with dementia who made a transition to institutional long-term care. Methods: Qualitative data on the expected and actual reasons for admission were collected via open-ended questions at baseline and follow-up. Furthermore, at baseline, data were collected using measurement instruments to measure pre-admission characteristics. Interviews took place between November 2010-April 2012. After categorizing the answers, the agreement between the expected and actual reasons was calculated. Furthermore, bivariate associations were calculated between the actual reasons for admission and scores on corresponding measurement instruments. Results/Findings: For most informal caregivers, there was agreement between their statements on the expected reason and the actual reason for admission. A third of the caregivers showed no conformity. Bivariate associations showed that there is also agreement between the actual reasons for admission and scores on corresponding measurement instruments. Conclusion: Informal caregivers can be considered reliable sources of information regarding what causes the admission of a person with dementia. Professional care should anticipate informal caregivers' statements and collaborate with them to strive for timely and appropriate admission

Potentially inappropriate medication among people with dementia in eight European countries

© The Author 2017. Objectives: to evaluate the frequency of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) prescription among older people with dementia (PwD) from eight countries participating in the European study 'RightTimePlaceCare', and to evaluate factors and adverse outcomes associated with PIM prescription.Methods: survey of 2,004 PwD including a baseline assessment and follow-up after 3 months. Interviewers gathered data on age, sex, prescription of medication, cognitive status, functional status, comorbidity, setting and admission to hospital, fall-related injuries and mortality in the time between baseline and follow-up. The European Union(7)-PIM list was used to evaluate PIM prescription. Multivariate regression analysis was used to investigate factors and adverse outcomes associated with PIM prescription.Results: overall, 60% of the participants had at least one PIM prescription and 26.4% at least two. The PIM therapeutic subgroups most frequently prescribed were psycholeptics (26% of all PIM prescriptions) and 'drugs for acid-related disorders' (21%). PwD who were 80 years and older, lived in institutional long-term care settings, had higher comorbidity and were more functionally impaired were at higher risk of being prescribed two PIM or more. The prescription of two or more PIM was associated with higher chance of suffering from at least one fall-related injury and at least one episode of hospitalisation in the time between baseline and follow-up.Conclusions: PIM use among PwD is frequent and is associated with institutional long-term care, age, advanced morbidity and functional impairment. It also appears to be associated with adverse outcomes. Special attention should be paid to psycholeptics and drugs for acid-related disorders