Search

Objectives: Cognitive impairment, pain and depressive symptoms are common and interrelated factors in older adults. However, the directionality and specificity of their association remains unclarified. This study explored whether these factors prospectively increase reciprocal risk and examined the longitudinal association between these factors and quality of life (QoL). Methods: This study used longitudinal data from The Older Persons and Informal Caregivers Survey Minimal Data Set (TOPICS‐MDS; the Netherlands). Older adults self‐reported cognitive impairment, pain, depressive symptoms and QoL at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of follow‐up. The Random Intercept Cross‐Lagged Panel Model was used to assess the prospective association between the three factors, while a multilevel linear regression analysis in a two‐level random intercept model was used to examine the longitudinal associations between the three factors and QoL at the within‐person level. Results: The data of 11,582 home‐dwelling older adults with or without subjective cognitive impairment were analysed. At the within‐person level, pain at 6 months was associated with subsequent depressive symptoms (β = 0.04, p = 0.024). The reverse association from depression to pain, and longitudinal associations between pain and subjective cognitive impairment and between depressive symptoms and subjective cognitive impairment were non‐significant. Pain, depressive symptoms and subjective cognitive impairment showed a significant association with poor QoL 6 months later. Conclusions: A directional relationship was observed from pain to depressive symptoms. Pain reduction holds a potential benefit in the prevention of depressive symptoms, ultimately optimising the QoL of older adults. Key points: Older adults have multiple chronic conditions, and subjective cognitive impairment, pain and depressive symptoms are common and interrelated factors which affect the quality of life.Home‐dwelling older adults experiencing pain were more likely to report later depressive symptoms.Pain, depressive symptoms and subjective cognitive impairment were associated with subsequent poor quality of life.Pain reduction may help prevent depressive symptoms and poor quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: For older people who worry about their memory, their general practitioner (GP) is often the first healthcare professional they turn to. This study aims to increase knowledge of GPs' daily practice on diagnostic strategies for patients who present themselves with memory complaints and/or worries about dementia for the first time in general practice and to explore associations of patients' characteristics with these strategies. Method: Retrospective observational study using electronic patient records from patients presenting with memory complaints between 2012 and 2019. The patient records are derived from a Dutch primary care registration network. The decision on diagnostic strategy was extracted and categorized as (1) wait and see, (2) diagnostic testing in primary care, or (3) referral. Patient characteristics (gender, age, general practice, level of comorbidities, chronic polypharmacy, and the number of consultations on memory complaints), fear of developing dementia, and information on why the first consultation on memory complaints was scheduled were extracted. Results: A total of 228 patients were included. Most patients were cared for within primary care, either for further primary care diagnostics (56.1%) or because a wait‐and‐see strategy was pursued (14.9%). One‐third (28.9%) of patients were referred. Differences between diagnostic strategies in patient characteristics, fear of developing dementia, or reason for first consultation between these diagnostic strategies were not found, nor were these variables predictive of referral. Conclusion: Most Dutch patients with memory complaints and/or worries about dementia who seek help from their GP for the first time are cared for in the primary care setting for the following 6 months. The lack of association between included patient characteristics and diagnostic strategies highlights the complexity of the decision‐making process on diagnostic testing for dementia in general practice. Key points: Most Dutch patients who seek help for memory complaints from their general practitioner (GP) for the first time are not referred for specialized diagnostic testing, which underlines the crucial and gatekeeper role GPs play in the management and care for this patient group.Previous qualitative research indicates that GPs consider patient characteristics important in decisions on diagnostic trajectories for memory complaints. Retrospective data from the studied electronic patient records, however, indicates that patient characteristics such as age and comorbidity do not differ between diagnostic strategies nor are they predictive for referrals.Further unraveling of the complex decision‐making process for diagnostic testing for dementia is needed to facilitate timely dementia diagnoses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) is becoming increasingly important in medical care. Some suggest standardized approaches to initiate ACP with all older adults. However, the idea of patient-centered care suggests more nuanced approaches tailored to individual older adults' needs. This study investigated how older adults with different views and needs about ACP can be approached in an adequate and most beneficial way by health care professionals. Methods: We used questionnaires, interviews, focus groups and informal conversations with older adults, living in their own homes, who volunteered to take part in our research. The research was participatory as we collaborated closely with practice partners and we used the obtained findings immediately and continuously to inform the next steps of our research throughout the process. Results: We identified three subgroups of older adults with differential needs regarding ACP-related activities: The first group avoids talking about their needs and wishes for care towards the end of life. These older people benefit from activities, which aim at motivating them to concern themselves with ACP-related topics. The second group consists of older adults who are in principle open for ACP-conversations but do not initiate these themselves. This group either trusts their next-of-kin or their healthcare professional to act in accordance with their wishes or does not bring up the topic in order to avoid confronting relevant others with possibly unpleasant topics. This group of people benefits from information about ACP and from healthcare professionals initiating the ACP process. The third group of older people initiates the ACP process themselves, gathers information, and takes the necessary steps for ACP. With this group it remains relevant to check carefully whether they have indeed taken all relevant steps and shared the information with all relevant involved care institutions and relatives. Conclusions: We propose a model to simplify adjustments of ACP to individuals' needs. Our suggested approach might contribute to increasing the motivation of older people to engage in ACP conversations if these are more closely related to their own needs. Further, it might also contribute to simplifying the individual shaping of the ACP process for healthcare professionals as our suggested model offers clear guidance for approaching different types of older people in different ways. The suggested approach may in future be used for training health care professionals in the conduct of ACP conversations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Relocations within and between nursing homes often induce stress, anxiety, and depression in residents and cause additional workload for and burnout in staff. To prevent this, many nursing homes deploy pre-transition initiatives, bridging initiatives, and post-transition initiatives to support residents and staff during the relocation process. As little is known about these initiatives, this study aims to explore the pre-relocation, bridging and post-relocation initiatives used for relocations within and between nursing homes. Methods: In seven Dutch nursing homes, eight focus groups were conducted with two to six participants (N = 37) who were actively involved in relocation processes in different roles (i.e., managers, healthcare professionals, support staff, client council members, residents and family). The focus groups were conducted based on a predefined topic list and lasted approximately 60 min. The transcripts were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic coding. Results: Nursing homes had to be inventive in developing relocation initiatives as neither shared guidelines nor knowledge exchange on this topic were available. A total of thirty-seven relocation initiatives were identified in these seven nursing homes. Nineteen pre-relocation initiatives were identified, of which eight emphasized information and engagement, three highlighted training and practice and eight stressed orientation and visualization. Seven bridging initiatives were identified, of which four emphasized coordination and continuity and three highlighted entertainment and celebration. Eleven post-relocation initiatives were identified, of which seven emphasized evaluation and troubleshooting and four highlighted change and adjustment. Conclusion: The identified relocation initiatives were developed unassisted by nursing homes, due to a lack of shared guidelines, knowledge exchange and mutual learning on this topic. Therefore, it may be expedient and more effective to develop general guidelines for relocations within and between nursing homes in collaboration with nursing homes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background This study aims to provide greater insight into the current decision-making process on diagnostic testing for dementia by exploring the expectations, needs and experiences of patients with memory complaints, significant others and general practitioners (GPs). Methods We performed semi-structured interviews with patients (>60 years) who consulted their GP on memory complaints, significant others and GPs. Participants were recruited until data saturation was reached in thematic analysis of interview transcripts. Results We performed 51 interviews (patients n  = 20, significant others n  = 15, GPs n  = 16). Thematic analysis revealed four themes: (i) 'drivers to (not) testing', i.e. need to act on symptoms, beliefs on the necessity and expected outcomes of diagnostic testing; (ii) 'patient preferences and context are critical in the actual decision', i.e. in the actual decision-making process interpretation of symptoms, GPs' desire to meet patient preferences, social context and healthcare system dynamics guided the decision; (iii) 'need for individualised communication in the decision-making process', i.e. for patients feeling heard was a prerequisite for decision-making and GPs tailored communication strategies to individual patients and (iv) 'GP practice and barriers to shared decision-making (SDM)', i.e. although GPs value SDM in the decision on diagnostic testing for dementia, patients express limited awareness of the decision and options at stake. Conclusions Decision-making on diagnostic testing for dementia is a multifactorial and preference-guided process for all involved stakeholders, but decisions are often not explicitly jointly made. Development of patient decision aids could facilitate better involvement and more informed choices by patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dementia is a clinical diagnosis without curative treatment. It is uncertain whether ancillary testing is beneficial for patients. This study investigates the association between use of diagnostic tests and time to poor outcome and health care costs. Nationwide register-based cohort study using health care reimbursement data in the Netherlands. All Dutch hospitals, including 13,312 patients diagnosed with dementia in 2018. Diagnostic testing included computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI), neuropsychological examination (NPE), nuclear imaging (PET/SPECT), electroencephalography (EEG), and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing. We compared time to poor outcome (institutionalization or death) and costs per month from 2018 to 2021 between those who underwent a specific diagnostic test in previous years to controls, propensity score matched for age, sex, type of hospital, and comorbidity. Time to poor outcome in those who underwent CT/MRI, EEG, or CSF testing was similar to those who did not, but was longer for those who underwent NPE. Time to poor outcome was shorter in patients who underwent PET/SPECT. Patients who underwent CSF testing or PET/SPECT had higher mean total health care costs as compared to controls (CSF €248, 95% CI 64-433; PET/SPECT: €315, 95% CI 179-451). NPE during the diagnostic trajectory was associated with lower total health care cost (–€127, 95% CI –62, –193). NPE was associated with longer time to poor outcome and lower health care costs, potentially due to confounding by indication. Patients who underwent neuroimaging (CT, MRI, SPECT/PET), CSF testing, or EEG for dementia diagnostics did not experience a longer time to poor outcome or lower health care costs. This emphasizes the importance of clinical examination as anchor for the diagnosis of dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]