Working with older drinkers

Findings presented in this report demonstrate that older drinkers have different stressors, precipitating factors and risk factors for relapse than younger drinkers. They also face a number of unique barriers to treatment and are more likely to remain ‘hidden’ from services. Despite these challenges, age-specific practices required to meet the needs of older people and draw them into treatment are poorly understood. The purpose of this project was to develop guidelines on what strategies and treatment approaches are likely to work best with older drinkers based on synthesis of relevant literature, insight from alcohol practitioners who specialise in working with older people and the perspectives of older people receiving alcohol treatment. A set of concise guidance documents will be prepared for health and social care workers and alcohol service providers in due course

Development of an item pool for a patient reported outcome measure of resilience for people living with dementia

Abstract Background and objectives Policies to support people living with dementia increasingly focus on strengths-based approaches, highlighting the importance of building resilience. This research responds to the lack of a suitable resilience measure for people with dementia. It develops a pool of items to inform a new measure of resilience for this population. Methods A conceptual model and associated data informed the item generation of the draft resilience measure. Regular meetings with professionals (n = 7) discussed response-scale formatting, content and face validity, leading to refinement and item reduction. Cognitive interviews with people living with dementia (n = 11) then examined the face and content validity of items and the suitability of response-scale formatting. These two phases informed subsequent revision and further item reduction of the resilience measure. Results The first item generation exercise led to 140 items. These were independently assessed by the professionals and this refinement reduced the measure to 63 items across 7 domains of the conceptual model (psychological strengths; practical approaches for adapting to life with dementia; continuing with hobbies, interests and activities; strong relationships with family and friends; peer support and education; participating in community activities; the role of professional support services). Cognitive interviews explored the 63 items with people living with dementia. Detailed feedback led to items removed due to difficulty with (a) understanding (N = 7); (b) answering (n = 11); (c) low preference for that item (n = 6); and (d) presence of a preferred item within a cluster of similar questions (n = 4). Items were amended to enhance clarity/conciseness (n = 19) leading to a final 37-item pool. Conclusion Established methods for measurement development included the expertise of people with dementia and led to the generation of a set of items for a new resilience measure that were understandable and acceptable to this target population. This 37-item pool reflects the conceptual understanding of resilience in dementia as being derived across individual, community and societal level resources

Development of an item pool for a patient reported outcome measure of resilience for people living with dementia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Policies to support people living with dementia increasingly focus on strengths-based approaches, highlighting the importance of building resilience. This research responds to the lack of a suitable resilience measure for people with dementia. It develops a pool of items to inform a new measure of resilience for this population. METHODS: A conceptual model and associated data informed the item generation of the draft resilience measure. Regular meetings with professionals (n = 7) discussed response-scale formatting, content and face validity, leading to refinement and item reduction. Cognitive interviews with people living with dementia (n = 11) then examined the face and content validity of items and the suitability of response-scale formatting. These two phases informed subsequent revision and further item reduction of the resilience measure. RESULTS: The first item generation exercise led to 140 items. These were independently assessed by the professionals and this refinement reduced the measure to 63 items across 7 domains of the conceptual model (psychological strengths; practical approaches for adapting to life with dementia; continuing with hobbies, interests and activities; strong relationships with family and friends; peer support and education; participating in community activities; the role of professional support services). Cognitive interviews explored the 63 items with people living with dementia. Detailed feedback led to items removed due to difficulty with (a) understanding (N = 7); (b) answering (n = 11); (c) low preference for that item (n = 6); and (d) presence of a preferred item within a cluster of similar questions (n = 4). Items were amended to enhance clarity/conciseness (n = 19) leading to a final 37-item pool. CONCLUSION: Established methods for measurement development included the expertise of people with dementia and led to the generation of a set of items for a new resilience measure that were understandable and acceptable to this target population. This 37-item pool reflects the conceptual understanding of resilience in dementia as being derived across individual, community and societal level resources

'I have never bounced back': resilience and living with dementia

OBJECTIVE: This work responds to the limited research about resilience when living with dementia and develops a conceptual model to inform service development and healthcare practices for this population. METHODS: An iterative process of theory building across four phases of activity (scoping review n = 9 studies), stakeholder engagement (n = 7), interviews (n = 11) generated a combined sample of 87 people living with dementia and their carers, including those affected by rare dementias to explore their lived experiences. An existing framework of resilience developed in other populations served as the starting point to analyse and synthesise the findings, inspiring a new conceptual model of resilience unique to the experience of living with dementia. RESULTS: The synthesis suggests resilience encompasses the daily struggles of living with a dementia; people are not flourishing, thriving or 'bouncing back', but are managing and adapting under pressure and stress. The conceptual model suggests resilience may be achieved through the collective and collaborative role of psychological strengths, practical approaches to adapting to life with dementia, continuing with hobbies, interests and activities, strong relationships with family and friends, peer support and education, participating in community activities and support from healthcare professionals. Most of these themes are not reflected in resilience outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners adopting a strengths-based approach utilising the conceptual model at the point of diagnosis and post-diagnosis support may help individuals achieve resilience through appropriately tailored services and support. This 'resilience practice' could also extend to other degenerative or debilitating chronic conditions a person faces in their life course

Dementia in rural settings: A scoping review exploring the personal experiences of people with dementia and their carers

Rural areas tend to be inhabited by more older people and thus have a higher prevalence of dementia. Combined with lower population densities and more sparse geography, rural areas pose numerous barriers and costs relating to support and resource provision. This may leave people with dementia in rural places at a significant disadvantage, leading to a heavy reliance on informal support networks. The present study explores the personal experiences of people living with dementia and carers living in rural areas, seeking to discover both benefits and challenges, as well as recommendations within the literature for improving the lives of those affected by dementia in rural areas. A scoping review following the framework of Arksey and O'Malley identified 60 studies that describe or discuss the personal experience of dementia (either by the person with dementia or carer), in relation to living in rural or remote geographical areas. Four overarching themes were derived, namely the possible benefits of living in a rural community (supportive rural communities), sources of strength described by people affected by dementia in rural areas (managing and coping), detrimental aspects of living in a rural community (rural community challenges) and difficulties with dementia care services. Three further themes yielded recommendations for improving the experience of dementia in rural areas. This review highlights some potential opportunities related to living in rural areas for people living with dementia. These often come with parallel challenges, reflecting a delicate balance between being well-supported and being in crisis for those living in rural areas. Given the limited access to formal services, supporting people with dementia in rural areas requires input and innovation from the people, organisations and services local to those communities

Situating support for people living with rarer forms of dementia

BACKGROUND: Awareness of a multitude of diseases that can cause neurodegenerative decline and their unique symptom profiles in the dementia care and support sectors remains limited. Obtaining an accurate diagnosis and post-diagnostic care and support is a challenge for many people and their families. As part of a larger study examining multi-component forms of support for people living with rarer dementias, the aim of this present study was to examine how rare dementia was situated within the complex social groupings, their organization and embedded discursive constructions that broadly form dementia care and support delivery. METHODS: Adopting a situational analysis approach, we undertook an examination of public documents and organizational websites within the support sector for people living with dementia in Canada, England, and Wales. We also surveyed professionals to further explore the situation at the point of care and support delivery. Consistent with our approach, data collection and analysis occurred concurrently including the development of a series of analytic maps. RESULTS: Recognizing the complexities within the situation, our findings provided new insights on the situated structures for support action and the discursive representations that illuminate both the limitations of the current support landscape and possibilities for a more flexible and tailored rare dementia support. Alongside, the predominant universal versus tailored support positionings within our data reinforced the complexity from which a promising new social space for people living with rarer dementias is being cultivated. CONCLUSIONS: The social worlds engaged in supportive action with people living with rare dementia are less visible within the shadow of a universally constructed dementia support milieu and appear to be negotiated within this powerful arena. However, their evolving organization and discursive constructions point to an emerging new social space for people living with rarer conditions