Search

Objectives: For many people with dementia and unpaid carers, using technology for care and support has become essential. Rapid proliferation of technology highlights the need to understand digital access to health and social care services for dementia. This mixed‐methods systematic review aims to explore digital access to health and social care services for dementia, from the perspective of people with dementia and unpaid carers. Methods: Nine electronic databases were searched in May 2023 for qualitative, quantitative, or mixed‐method studies, published in English or German, focused on experiences of using technology‐delivered health and social care services for people with dementia and unpaid carers. After removal of duplicates and screening, 44 empirical papers were included. Results: From the 44 studies, findings were grouped into five categories, highlighting experiences for people with dementia and unpaid carers: (1) Adapting to technology, (2) Inequalities and variations in outcomes, (3) Impact on caring, (4) Impact on health, and (5) Impact on relationships. Proliferation of technology in care access emphasised the need for quick adaptation to technology and examination of its impact. The impact of such service delivery has evidenced mixed findings. There were improvements in the health and wellbeing of people with dementia and unpaid carers, and benefits for their dyadic relationship. However, using technology for health and social care access is not always possible and is often reliant on unpaid carers for support. Lower tech‐literacy, lack of equipment or money to buy equipment and poor internet connection can impact the potential for positive outcomes. Conclusions: Technology can bring great benefits: social inclusion, improved service access and care. However, using technology in service delivery in dementia needs careful thought. Professionals and service providers need to be cognizant of the complex nature of dementia, and the benefits and challenges of hybrid service delivery. Key points: Evidence emphasises benefits and challenges to the availability, implementation, use, of technology in health and social care access in dementia.Though there are issues, technology can help improve quality of life for people with dementia, can support carers to care, and facilitate positive relationships between unpaid carers and people with dementia.Proliferation of technology for care access was expedited during COVID‐19, but has not been equally rolled out, making remote and disadvantaged groups less well‐served.A hybrid delivery of services in which people are given choice of delivery method, and are supported in accessing and using technology, will better serve people with dementia and unpaid carers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Receiving and accessing care after a diagnosis of dementia, both for the person and their carer, are fraught with inequalities. The aim of this public engagement activity was to co‐produce a board game about dementia inequalities to facilitate learning, dialogue and educate about different barriers, and facilitators, to diagnosis and care and to test the game's impact on dementia knowledge with the general public. Methods: Two virtual and two face‐to‐face workshops with people with dementia, unpaid carers, health and social care professionals and Third Sector representatives were held between October 2022 and June 2023. Virtual workshops involved discussions of inequalities and how a board game may feature inequalities. The first face‐to‐face workshop was split into the same activities, aided by outcomes from workshops 1 and 2. Workshop 4 attendees tested the prototype. The impact of the game on knowledge about dementia and inequalities was tested at a game play workshop in October 2023. Results: Forty stakeholders attended four workshops. Workshops provided step‐by‐step thoughts on how the game could be designed or modified. The final game, prototype tested in workshop 4, consists of a one‐sided, two‐half board depicting the prediagnosis process (left half) and postdiagnosis process (right half). Fifty‐two members of the general public participated in the game play workshop, which led to significant improvements in knowledge about dementia (p <.001) and inequalities (p <.001). Discussion: The game can be used to improve knowledge about dementia inequalities for health and social care professionals, carers, people living with dementia, decision makers and the general public. Patient or Public Contribution: This engagement activity fully involved people with dementia, unpaid carers, health and social care professionals and Third Sector representatives throughout, with two unpaid carers as public advisers on the team. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Too often, dementia research is conducted in research silos without thorough integration and the involvement of people with lived experiences, care professionals and the Third Sector. Research can also get lost in academic publications, without reaching those benefiting most from the evidence. The aim of this methods and evaluation paper was to outline the aims, components and evaluation of the public‐facing and ‐engaging Liverpool Dementia & Ageing Research Forum, to provide a blueprint for setting up similar communities of practice. Methods: The Forum was set up in 2019 with the aim to (a) connect different stakeholders in dementia and ageing and co‐produce research and to (b) inform and educate. This paper provides an account of the Forum model and evaluates the following key elements: (1) engagement; (2) experiences of the Forum and its impact (via an online evaluation survey and three reflections). All Forum members and attendees were asked to complete a brief evaluation survey about their experiences from October to November 2022. Three regular Forum attendees provided a case study about their involvement and its impact. Findings: The Forum has reached out to diverse stakeholders and the general public, generating growing interest and engagement since its initiation. Forty‐four members and attendees completed the survey. Most attendees completing the evaluation survey have so far engaged in between 5 and 20 activities (47.8%), and 91% felt the aims of the Forum have been met. Engaging in the Forum has produced various benefits for attendees, including increased research capacity and knowledge, as well as improved connectivity with other stakeholders. Eleven percent of respondents, 39% of lived experts, stated they experienced improved access to postdiagnostic care. Conclusions: This is the first reported multistakeholder Community of Practice (CoP) on dementia and ageing. We make key recommendations for setting up and running similar dementia CoP, as they provide a noninterventional format for raising awareness, capacity and access to dementia care. Patient and Public Involvement: This paper reports on the involvement and engagement of people with dementia, unpaid carers, health and social care providers and Third Sector organisations in a CoP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dementia Care Navigators (DCNs) are professionals without clinical training, who provide individualised emotional and practical support to people living with dementia, working alongside clinical services. Navigator services have been implemented but the service offered vary without a consistent overview provided. The aim of this narrative systematic review was to describe and compare existing service formats, and to synthesise evidence regarding their implementation and impacts. Methods: The review was registered on PROSPERO [CRD42021292518]. Three electronic databases were searched and included studies reported on a DCN service, defined as a service in which non‐clinically trained workers provide personalised advice and support to people with dementia and/or carers in the community. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and titles and read through full papers for inclusion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Standard Quality Assessment QualSyst. Results: We included 14 papers reporting on six studies. All services were US‐based and only varied by integration and training provided. Studies reported different degrees of impact on service utilisation and on symptoms and mental well‐being of people with dementia and their carers, with too little evidence to draw substantial/meaningful conclusions and studies employing different outcome measures. One study evidenced greater impacts on people with more advanced dementia compared to earlier stages. Conclusions: DCN services have the potential to effectively provide non‐clinical support to people with dementia and carers from the point of diagnosis. Further research from countries other than the USA, focusing on the impact on social care and social support service access and utilisation, and utilising similar established outcome measures are required. Key points: Evidence on the impact of Dementia Care Navigators (DCNs) is limited but shows promising benefits for people living with dementia and their carers.More research needs to be conducted in countries other than the US, where all evidence was reported, and with similar outcome measures to allow comparison.DCNs are a highly useful professional group without medical training, who can navigate people living with dementia and their carers to support and provide support themselves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To understand how the delivery of dementia‐related social support services across the UK adapted during the pandemic. Methods: We devised a two‐part online and telephone longitudinal survey. Providers participated between March and June 2021, and again 3 months later. Information relating to services delivered and delivery methods employed was collected before and during the pandemic at two timepoints (T1 and T2). Results: A total of 75 participants completed the survey at T1, with 58 participants completing the survey at both timepoints. Thirty‐six participants had complete data at T1. Day care centres and support groups were the most delivered primary services. During the pandemic, services shifted from in‐person to remote or hybrid. While in‐person services started to resume at T2, most services remained hybrid. At T2, the frequency of service delivery increased, however, a decreasing trend in usage was observed across survey timepoints. The telephone was the most employed format to deliver remote and hybrid services, however, reliance on videoconferencing software significantly increased at T1. Videoconferencing software was often used alongside the telephone and emails to remotely deliver services. Conclusions: Services were able to adapt and provide support to some service recipients. Complementing novel approaches to service delivery with more traditional formats may facilitate access to service recipients with limited digital literacy. Following the easing of public health measures, many service recipients may be reluctant to engage with in‐person services. Thus, the provision of in‐person and remote services needs to be carefully balanced amidst the current hybrid landscape. Patient or Public Contribution: Two public advisors (a former unpaid carer and a person living with dementia) were involved in designing and piloting the tool, interpreting the results and disseminating the findings. Both public advisors have experience in delivering dementia‐related social support services before and or during the pandemic in the United Kingdom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Considering the adverse outcomes of COVID‐19, it is essential to provide adequate support and care for people with dementia and informal carers. Technology can reduce the distress associated with social distancing rules and the decreased access to in‐person services. This study aimed to explore the use of technology and its perceived effects across different settings and countries. Methods: The sample was composed of 127 informal carers and 15 people with dementia from the UK, Italy, Australia and Poland. Semi‐structured interviews explored participants' experiences of using technology and their perceived effects. Transcripts were analysed by researchers in each country using an inductive approach. Results: Three overarching themes were developed: (1) Technology kept us alive during COVID‐19; (2) Remote care was anything but easy; (3) Perceived technology limitations. Many similarities emerged between countries supporting the role of technology for being socially engaged, having a routine, and staying active. However, the benefits of technology for health and psychosocial care were more limited. Across countries, barriers to the access and use of technology included lack of digital literacy, dementia severity, and lack of appropriate digital environments. Help and supervision from carers were also necessary and sometimes perceived as an additional burden. Conclusions: Technology can effectively reduce the shrinking world that may be amplified by the pandemic, thus preserving people with dementia's social skills and maintaining family connections. However, for more extensive and well‐adapted use of technology in dementia care, actions should be taken to overcome the barriers to the access and use of technology by older and vulnerable people globally. Key points: During COVID‐19 technology allowed people with dementia and informal carers to be socially engaged, have a routine, and stay active.Benefits of technology in dementia health and psychosocial care were limited.Barriers to the access and use of technology included lack of digital literacy, dementia severity, and lack of appropriate digital environments.The pandemic should prompt actions towards a more extensive and well‐adapted use of technology in dementia care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of this national survey was to explore the impact of COVID‐19 public health measures on access to social support services and the effects of closures of services on the mental well‐being of older people and those affected by dementia. Methods: A UK‐wide online and telephone survey was conducted with older adults, people with dementia, and carers between April and May 2020. The survey captured demographic and postcode data, social support service usage before and after COVID‐19 public health measures, current quality of life, depression, and anxiety. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to explore the relationship between social support service variations and anxiety and well‐being. Results: Five hundred and sixty‐nine participants completed the survey (61 people with dementia, 285 unpaid carers, and 223 older adults). Paired samples t‐tests and X2‐tests showed that the mean hour of weekly social support service usage and the number of people having accessed various services was significantly reduced post COVID‐19. Multiple regression analyses showed that higher variations in social support service hours significantly predicted increased levels of anxiety in people with dementia and older adults, and lower levels of mental well‐being in unpaid carers and older adults. Conclusions: Being unable to access social support services due to COVID contributed to worse quality of life and anxiety in those affected by dementia and older adults across the UK. Social support services need to be enabled to continue providing support in adapted formats, especially in light of continued public health restrictions for the foreseeable future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dementia Care Navigators (DCNs) are professionals without clinical training, who provide individualised emotional and practical support to people living with dementia, working alongside clinical services. Navigator services have been implemented widely but the service offered vary without a consistent overview provided. The aim of this narrative systematic review was to describe and compare existing models, and to synthesise evidence regarding their implementation and impacts. Methods: The review was registered on PROSPERO [CRD42021292518]. Three electronic databases were searched and included studies reported on a DCN model, defined as a service in which non‐clinically trained workers provide personalised advice and support to people with dementia and/or carers in the community. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and titles and read through full papers for inclusion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Standard Quality Assessment QualSyst. Results: We included 13 papers (six studies). All models were US‐based and only varied by integration and training provided. Studies reported different degrees of impact on service utilisation and on symptoms and mental well‐being of people with dementia and their carers, with too little evidence to draw substantial/meaningful conclusions. One study evidenced greater impacts on people with more advanced dementia compared to earlier stages. Conclusions: DCN models have the potential to effectively provide non‐clinical support to people with dementia and carers from the point of diagnosis. Further research from countries other than the USA, focusing on the impact on social care and social support service access and utilisation, and utilising similar stablished outcome measures are required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]