Using Meta-Ethnography to Synthesize Relevant Studies: Capturing the Bigger Picture in Dementia with Challenging Behavior within Families

In understanding the range and depth of people’s experiences, it is important to include the wide range of approaches which capture the richness within a given knowledge base. However, systematic reviews using quantitative data alone risk missing findings that can contribute to a better understanding of a research question. In response, meta-ethnography has emerged as a potentially useful method to synthesize and integrate both qualitative and quantitative data from different perspectives using qualitative methodology. In this case study, we describe how we have used meta-ethnography to better understand how families experience dementia. We address a particular issue of selecting the highest quality evidence across a range of epistemologies

Improving quality of life for people with dementia in care homes: Making psychosocial interventions work

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Cambridge University Press via the DOI in this recordPsychosocial interventions can improve behaviour and mood in people with dementia, but it is unclear how to maximise their effectiveness or acceptability in residential settings. Aims To understand what underlies the successful implementation of psychosocial interventions in care homes. Method Systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research. Results The synthesis of 39 qualitative papers revealed that beneficial psychosocial interventions met the needs of people with dementia to connect with others, make a meaningful contribution and reminisce. Successful implementation rested on the active engagement of staff and family and the continuing provision of tailored interventions and support. This necessitated staff time, and raised issues around priorities and risk, but ultimately helped redefine staff attitudes towards residents and the caregiving role. Conclusions The findings from the meta-synthesis can help to inform the development and evaluation of psychosocial interventions in care homes and support their widespread implementation in clinical settings.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR

The role of memory clinics and psychosocial intervention in the early stages of dementia.

Opening paragraph:Memory clinics, established as a specialist out-patient service offering assessment, early diagnosis, treatment and advice for people with memory disorders, can be found in Europe, Australia and the USA. In the UK, dementia is the major concern of these clinics (Lindesay, 1995; Wright and Lindesay, 1995) and much of their activity has a research focus, largely centred on anti-dementia drugs. Despite the multidisciplinary nature of these clinics, few studies have emerged focusing upon psychosocial and psychoeducational interventions. Arriving at, and feeding back, the diagnosis is a potent intervention, the impact of which has yet to be explored. Counselling is available in only a few centres (Gilliard and Gwilliam, 1996) and Hillet al.'s (1995) user satisfaction survey indicated that explanation of, and advice on, dealing with memory problems were areas where most carers 'and patients' expectations were not met

Practitioners’ understanding of barriers to accessing specialist support by family carers of people with dementia in distress

Distressing symptoms in dementia are hard to manage for many family carers. This article explores practitioners' perceptions of the barriers to accessing skilled behaviour management support encountered by carers. A survey of cases referred to the English National Health Service (n = 5,360) was followed by in-depth group discussions and practitioner interviews. Data revealed that practitioners focused on care home residents or older people with mental health problems other than dementia, rather than community-dwelling people with dementia and families. Barriers to access included misperceptions about the nature of distressing behaviour affecting carers and structural limitations in the capacity of specialist services to respond to carers

Practitioners’ understanding of barriers to accessing specialist support by family carers of people with dementia in distress

Distressing symptoms in dementia are hard to manage for many family carers. This article explores practitioners' perceptions of the barriers to accessing skilled behaviour management support encountered by carers. A survey of cases referred to the English National Health Service (n = 5,360) was followed by in-depth group discussions and practitioner interviews. Data revealed that practitioners focused on care home residents or older people with mental health problems other than dementia, rather than community-dwelling people with dementia and families. Barriers to access included misperceptions about the nature of distressing behaviour affecting carers and structural limitations in the capacity of specialist services to respond to carers

Alzheimer Europe's position on involving people with dementia in research through PPI (patient and public involvement)

YesThis paper reflects Alzheimer Europe’s position on PPI (patient and public involvement) in the context of dementia research and highlights some of the challenges and potential risks and benefits associated with such meaningful involvement. The paper was drafted by Alzheimer Europe in collaboration with members of INTERDEM and the European Working Group of People with Dementia. It has been formally adopted by the Board of Alzheimer Europe and endorsed by the Board of INTERDEM and by the JPND working group ‘Dementia Outcome Measures - Charting New Territory’. Alzheimer Europe is keen to promote the involvement of people with dementia in research, not only as participants but also in the context of PPI, by generating ideas for research, advising researchers, being involved in consultations and being directly involved in research activities. This position paper is in keeping with this objective. Topics covered include, amongst others, planning involvement, establishing roles and responsibilities, training and support, managing information and input from PPI, recognising the contribution of people with dementia involved in research in this way, promoting and protecting the rights and well-being of people with dementia, training and support, and promoting an inclusive approach and the necessary infrastructure for PPI in dementia research.European Union's Health Programme (2014-2020), grant number 707934. This work received funding under an operating grant from the European Union's Health Programme (2014-2020), grant number 707934.European Union's Health Programme (2014–2020), grant number 707934

Appropriate disclosure of a diagnosis of dementia : identifying the key behaviours of 'best practice'

Background: Despite growing evidence that many people with dementia want to know their diagnosis, there is wide variation in attitudes of professionals towards disclosure. The disclosure of the diagnosis of dementia is increasingly recognised as being a process rather than a one-off behaviour. However, the different behaviours that contribute to this process have not been comprehensively defined. No intervention studies to improve diagnostic disclosure in dementia have been reported to date. As part of a larger study to develop an intervention to promote appropriate disclosure, we sought to identify important disclosure behaviours and explore whether supplementing a literature review with other methods would result in the identification of new behaviours. Methods: To identify a comprehensive list of behaviours in disclosure we conducted a literature review, interviewed people with dementia and informal carers, and used a consensus process involving health and social care professionals. Content analysis of the full list of behaviours was carried out. Results: Interviews were conducted with four people with dementia and six informal carers. Eight health and social care professionals took part in the consensus panel. From the interviews, consensus panel and literature review 220 behaviours were elicited, with 109 behaviours over-lapping. The interviews and consensus panel elicited 27 behaviours supplementary to the review. Those from the interviews appeared to be self-evident but highlighted deficiencies in current practice and from the panel focused largely on balancing the needs of people with dementia and family members. Behaviours were grouped into eight categories: preparing for disclosure; integrating family members; exploring the patient's perspective; disclosing the diagnosis; responding to patient reactions; focusing on quality of life and well-being; planning for the future; and communicating effectively. Conclusion: This exercise has highlighted the complexity of the process of disclosing a diagnosis of dementia in an appropriate manner. It confirms that many of the behaviours identified in the literature (often based on professional opinion rather than empirical evidence) also resonate with people with dementia and informal carers. The presence of contradictory behaviours emphasises the need to tailor the process of disclosure to individual patients and carers. Our combined methods may be relevant to other efforts to identify and define complex clinical practices for further study.This project is funded by UK Medical Research Council, Grant reference number G0300999

Feasibility and acceptability evaluation of the Promoting Independence in Dementia (PRIDE) intervention for living well with dementia

OBJECTIVES: Post-diagnostic psychosocial interventions could play an important role in supporting people with mild dementia remain independent. The Promoting Independence in Dementia (PRIDE) intervention was developed to address this. METHOD: The mixed methods non-randomized, pre-post feasibility study occurred across England. Facilitators were recruited from the voluntary sector and memory services. Participants and their supporters took part in the three-session intervention. Outcome measures were collected at baseline and follow-up. To evaluate acceptability, focus groups and interviews were conducted with a subsample of participants and facilitators. RESULTS: Contextual challenges to delivery including national research governance changes, affected recruitment of study sites. Thirty-four dyads consented, with 14 facilitators providing the intervention. Dyads took part in at least two sessions (79%), and 73% in all three. Outcome measures were completed by 79% without difficulty, with minimal missing data. No significant changes were found on pre and post assessments. Post hoc analysis found moderate effect size improvements for self-management (SMAS instrument) in people with dementia (d = 0.41) and quality of life (EQ5D measure) in carers (d = 0.40). Qualitative data indicated that dyads found PRIDE acceptable, as did intervention facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: The three-session intervention was well accepted by participant-dyads and intervention facilitators. A randomized controlled trial of PRIDE would need to carefully consider recruitment potential across geographically varied settings and site stratification according to knowledge of contextual factors, such as the diversity of post-diagnostic services across the country. Letting sites themselves be responsible for identifying suitable intervention facilitators was successful. The self-report measures showed potential to be included in the main trial

Factor structure and construct validity of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers (ASCOT-Carer)

Background: The ASCOT-Carer is a self-report instrument designed to measure social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL). This article presents the psychometric testing and validation of the ASCOT-Carer four response-level interview (INT4) in a sample of unpaid carers of adults who receive publicly-funded social care services in England. Methods: Unpaid carers were identified through a survey of users of publicly-funded social care services in England. 387 carers completed a face-to-face or telephone interview. Data on variables hypothesised to be related to SCRQoL (for example, characteristics of the carer, cared-for person and care situation) and measures of carer experience, strain, health-related quality of life and overall QoL were collected. Relationships between these variables and overall SCRQoL score were evaluated through correlation, ANOVA and regression analysis to test the construct validity of the scale. Internal reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha and feasibility by the number of missing responses. Results: The construct validity was supported by statistically significant relationships between SCRQoL and scores on instruments of related constructs, as well as with characteristics of the carer and care recipient in univariate and multivariate analyses. A Cronbach’s alpha of 0.87 (7 items) indicates that the internal reliability of the instrument is satisfactory and a low number of missing responses (<1%) indicates a high level of acceptance. Conclusions: The results provide evidence to support the construct validity, factor structure, internal reliability and feasibility of the ASCOT-Carer INT4 as an instrument for measuring social care-related quality of life of unpaid carers who care for adults with a variety of long-term conditions, disability or problems related to old age

Impact of antipsychotic review and non-pharmacological intervention on health-related quality of life in people with dementia living in care homes: WHELD-a factorial cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Very few interventional studies have directly examined the impact of treatment approaches on health-related quality of life (HRQL) in people with dementia. This is of particular importance in therapies to address behavioural symptoms, where HRQL is often severely affected. METHODS: Analysis within the WHELD cluster randomised factorial study in 16 UK care homes examining the impact of person-centred care in combination with antipsychotic review, social interaction and exercise interventions. This study analysed impact on HRQL through the DEMQOL-Proxy. RESULTS: Data on HRQL were available for 187 participants. People receiving antipsychotic review showed a significant worsening in two DEMQOL-Proxy domains (negative emotion: p = 0.02; appearance: p = 0.04). A best-case scenario analysis showed significant worsening for total DEMQOL-Proxy score. Social interaction intervention resulted in a significant benefit to HRQL (p = 0.04). There was no deterioration in HRQL in groups receiving both antipsychotic review and social interaction (p = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: This demonstrates an important detrimental impact of discontinuation of antipsychotics in dementia on HRQL, highlighting the need for careful review of best practice guidelines regarding antipsychotic use and emphasising the importance of providing evidence-based non-pharmacological interventions in conjunction with antipsychotic review. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd