MODEM: a comprehensive approach to modelling outcome and costs impacts of interventions for dementia. Protocol paper

Background: The MODEM project (A comprehensive approach to MODelling outcome and costs impacts of interventions for DEMentia) explores how changes in arrangements for the future treatment and care of people living with dementia, and support for family and other unpaid carers, could result in better outcomes and more efficient use of resources. Methods: MODEM starts with a systematic mapping of the literature on effective and (potentially) cost-effective interventions in dementia care. Those findings, as well as data from a cohort, will then be used to model the quality of life and cost impacts of making these evidence-based interventions more widely available in England over the period from now to 2040. Modelling will use a suite of models, combining microsimulation and macrosimulation methods, modelling the costs and outcomes of care, both for an individual over the life-course from the point of dementia diagnosis, and for individuals and England as a whole in a particular year. Project outputs will include an online Dementia Evidence Toolkit, making evidence summaries and a literature database available free to anyone, papers in academic journals and other written outputs, and a MODEM Legacy Model, which will enable local commissioners of services to apply the model to their own populations. Discussion: Modelling the effects of evidence-based cost-effective interventions and making this information widely available has the potential to improve the health and quality of life both of people with dementia and their carers, while ensuring that resources are used efficiently

Projections of multi-morbidity in the older population in England to 2035: estimates from the Population Ageing and Care Simulation (PACSim) model

Background models projecting future disease burden have focussed on one or two diseases. Little is known on how risk factors of younger cohorts will play out in the future burden of multi-morbidity (two or more concurrent long-term conditions). Design a dynamic microsimulation model, the Population Ageing and Care Simulation (PACSim) model, simulates the characteristics (sociodemographic factors, health behaviours, chronic diseases and geriatric conditions) of individuals over the period 2014–2040. Population about 303,589 individuals aged 35 years and over (a 1% random sample of the 2014 England population) created from Understanding Society, the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, and the Cognitive Function and Ageing Study II. Main outcome measures the prevalence of, numbers with, and years lived with, chronic diseases, geriatric conditions and multi-morbidity. Results between 2015 and 2035, multi-morbidity prevalence is estimated to increase, the proportion with 4+ diseases almost doubling (2015:9.8%; 2035:17.0%) and two-thirds of those with 4+ diseases will have mental ill-health (dementia, depression, cognitive impairment no dementia). Multi-morbidity prevalence in incoming cohorts aged 65–74 years will rise (2015:45.7%; 2035:52.8%). Life expectancy gains (men 3.6 years, women: 2.9 years) will be spent mostly with 4+ diseases (men: 2.4 years, 65.9%; women: 2.5 years, 85.2%), resulting from increased prevalence of rather than longer survival with multi-morbidity. Conclusions our findings indicate that over the next 20 years there will be an expansion of morbidity, particularly complex multi-morbidity (4+ diseases). We advocate for a new focus on prevention of, and appropriate and efficient service provision for those with, complex multi-morbidity

Supporting good quality, community-based end-of-life care for people living with dementia: the SEED research programme including feasibility RCT

Background In the UK, most people with dementia die in the community and they often receive poorer end-of-life care than people with cancer. Objective The overall aim of this programme was to support professionals to deliver good-quality, community-based care towards, and at, the end of life for people living with dementia and their families. Design The Supporting Excellence in End-of-life care in Dementia (SEED) programme comprised six interlinked workstreams. Workstream 1 examined existing guidance and outcome measures using systematic reviews, identified good practice through a national e-survey and explored outcomes of end-of-life care valued by people with dementia and family carers (n = 57) using a Q-sort study. Workstream 2 explored good-quality end-of-life care in dementia from the perspectives of a range of stakeholders using qualitative methods (119 interviews, 12 focus groups and 256 observation hours). Using data from workstreams 1 and 2, workstream 3 used co-design methods with key stakeholders to develop the SEED intervention. Worksteam 4 was a pilot study of the SEED intervention with an embedded process evaluation. Using a cluster design, we assessed the feasibility and acceptability of recruitment and retention, outcome measures and our intervention. Four general practices were recruited in North East England: two were allocated to the intervention and two provided usual care. Patient recruitment was via general practitioner dementia registers. Outcome data were collected at baseline, 4, 8 and 12 months. Workstream 5 involved economic modelling studies that assessed the potential value of the SEED intervention using a contingent valuation survey of the general public (n = 1002). These data informed an economic decision model to explore how the SEED intervention might influence care. Results of the model were presented in terms of the costs and consequences (e.g. hospitalisations) and, using the contingent valuation data, a cost–benefit analysis. Workstream 6 examined commissioning of end-of-life care in dementia through a narrative review of policy and practice literature, combined with indepth interviews with a national sample of service commissioners (n = 20). Setting The workstream 1 survey and workstream 2 included services throughout England. The workstream 1 Q-sort study and workstream 4 pilot trial took place in North East England. For workstream 4, four general practices were recruited; two received the intervention and two provided usual care. Results Currently, dementia care and end-of-life care are commissioned separately, with commissioners receiving little formal guidance and training. Examples of good practice rely on non-recurrent funding and leadership from an interested clinician. Seven key components are required for good end-of-life care in dementia: timely planning discussions, recognising end of life and providing supportive care, co-ordinating care, effective working with primary care, managing hospitalisation, continuing care after death, and valuing staff and ongoing learning. Using co-design methods and the theory of change, the seven components were operationalised as a primary care-based, dementia nurse specialist intervention, with a care resource kit to help the dementia nurse specialist improve the knowledge of family and professional carers. The SEED intervention proved feasible and acceptable to all stakeholders, and being located in the general practice was considered beneficial. None of the outcome measures was suitable as the primary outcome for a future trial. The contingent valuation showed that the SEED intervention was valued, with a wider package of care valued more than selected features in isolation. The SEED intervention is unlikely to reduce costs, but this may be offset by the value placed on the SEED intervention by the general public. Limitations The biggest challenge to the successful delivery and completion of this research programme was translating the ‘theoretical’ complex intervention into practice in an ever-changing policy and service landscape at national and local levels. A major limitation for a future trial is the lack of a valid and relevant primary outcome measure to evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention that influences outcomes for both individuals and systems. Conclusions Although the dementia nurse specialist intervention was acceptable, feasible and integrated well with existing care, it is unlikely to reduce costs of care; however, it was highly valued by all stakeholders (professionals, people with dementia and their families) and has the potential to influence outcomes at both an individual and a systems level. Future work There is no plan to progress to a full randomised controlled trial of the SEED intervention in its current form. In view of new National Institute for Health and Care Excellence dementia guidance, which now recommends a care co-ordinator for all people with dementia, the feasibility of providing the SEED intervention throughout the illness trajectory should be explored. Appropriate outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of such a complex intervention are needed urgently. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN21390601. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research, Vol. 8, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information