Search

This systematic review examined how information communication technologies (ICT) has been used to access remote post-diagnostic support that address the needs people with dementia, or those of dyad, and explored care recipients' views on accessing support remotely. Concepts relating to dementia and ICT were searched across six databases (PsychInfo, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Social Care Online, and Web of Science) in March 2021 and updated in March 2022. Studies published from 1990 and written in English, German or French were considered for inclusion. Methodological quality was appraised using the Hawker quality assessment tool and reporting structured according to PRISMA guidelines. The search yielded 8,485 citations. Following the removal of duplicates and screening processes, 18 papers reporting on 17 studies were included. Studies described a range of post-diagnostic support, including medical follow-ups and therapeutic sessions, and were often delivered on a one-to-one basis via videoconferencing software. Whilst often relying on assistance from unpaid carers, people with dementia directly engaged with ICT to access post-diagnostic support in 13 studies. Accessing post-diagnostic support remotely appears feasible, nevertheless, care recipients' views were mixed. Access was frequently facilitated by supplying devices and providing ongoing technological support. Accessing post-diagnostic support remotely is likely to benefit some care recipients, however, to prevent widening inequalities in access, services within the current hybrid landscape need to accommodate to people who are digitally excluded. Future research should capture the support provided by unpaid carers to facilitate the engagement of people with dementia to remote post-diagnostic support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Social support services such as day care centres are important in post-diagnostic dementia care to enable people living with dementia stay at home for longer. Little research has addressed potential inequalities in access, with no research on variations before and since COVID-19. The aim of this study was to explore inequalities in social support service usage before and since the pandemic. Methods: Unpaid carers and people living with dementia were interviewed over the phone about their experiences of accessing social support services before and since the COVID-19 pandemic. Transcripts were analysed for key themes using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Results: Fifty participants (42 unpaid carers; eight people living with dementia) were interviewed, and five themes identified: (1) Service issues; (2) Access issues; (3) Relying on own initiative; (4) New inequalities due to COVID-19; and (5) Missing out on the benefits of support services. Participants reported transport, finances, and location as factors reducing their ability to access support service pre-COVID, with inequalities remaining and at times exacerbated since. Carers and people living with dementia also reported struggling with accessing basic necessities during COVID, including food and medicines. Conclusions: Considering the benefits of accessing support services, resourced procedures and facilities are needed to maintain access to support services with more accessible remote support provision, enabling people from all backgrounds to access the care they need. [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: The aim of this Part I systematic review was to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the lives of people with dementia living in the community or in residential care. Part II focused on unpaid carers. Methods: This review was registered on PROSPERO [CRD42021248050]. Five data bases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science) were searched in July 2021. Studies were included if they reported on the impacts of the pandemic on people living with dementia, either in the community or residential settings, and published in English, German, Polish, or Spanish. Risk of bias was assessed using the Standard Quality Assessment QualSyst. Results: Forty papers from 33 studies reported on the effects of COVID-19 on people with dementia. Included studies were conducted across 15 countries, focusing on single-country evaluations except in one study. Three studies focused on care homes, whilst the remainder reported on the community. Studies were categorised into five impacts: Cognition; Independence and physical functioning; Behavioural symptoms; Well-being; and Access to care. All studies evidenced the negative pandemic impacts, including faster cognitive, physical, and behavioural deterioration, limited access to care, and poorer mental and social health. Conclusions: Future restrictions need to consider the need for people with dementia to stay cognitively, physically, and socially stimulated to live well, and this review provides a call for a future pandemic strategy for dementia. Longitudinal research is required on the long-term impacts of the pandemic on the lives of people with dementia, including time to care home entry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little is known on how the pandemic has changed care home care delivery. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of COVID‐19 on care provision and visits in care homes from staff and family members' perspectives. For this purpose, we conducted a telephone‐ and zoom‐based qualitative semi‐structured interview study. Care home staff and family carers of people living with dementia (PLWD) across the UK were recruited via convenience sampling and participated via telephone or online. Participants took part in a semi‐structured remote interview. Data were collected between October and November 2020. Anonymised transcripts were analysed separately by two research team members using thematic analysis, with codes discussed and themes generated jointly, supported by research team input. 42 participants (26 family carers and 16 care home staff) took part. Five themes were generated: (a) Care home reputation and financial implications; (b) Lack of care; (c) Communication or lack thereof; (d) Visiting rights/changes based on residents' needs; (e) Deterioration of residents. With a lack of clear guidance throughout the pandemic, care homes delivered care differently with disparities in the levels and types of visiting allowed for family members. Lack of communication between care homes and family members, but also government and care homes, led to family carers feeling excluded and concerned about the well‐being of their relative. Improved communication and clear guidance for care homes and the public are required to negate the potentially damaging effects of COVID‐19 restrictions upon residents, their families and the carers who support them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accessing social care and social support services is key to support the well-being of people living with dementia (PLWD) and unpaid carers. COVID-19 has caused sudden closures or radical modifications of these services, and is resulting in prolonged self-isolation. The aim of this study was to explore the effects of COVID-19 related social care and support service changes and closures on the lives of PLWD and unpaid carers. PLWD and unpaid carers were interviewed via telephone in April 2020. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Demographic characteristics including household Index of Multiple Deprivation score and weekly hours of social support service usage before and since the COVID-19 outbreak were also collected. Paired samples t-tests was used to compare the mean of weekly hours of social support service usage before and since the outbreak. 50 semi-structured interviews were conducted with unpaid carers (n = 42) and PLWD (n = 8). There was a significant reduction in social support service usage since the outbreak. Thematic analysis identified three overarching themes: (1) Loss of control; (2) Uncertainty; (3) Adapting and having to adapt to the new normal. Carers and PLWD were greatly affected by the sudden removal of social support services, and concerned about when services would re-open. Carers were worried about whether the person they cared for would still be able to re-join social support services. PLWD and carers need to receive specific practical and psychological support during the pandemic to support their well-being, which is severely affected by public health restrictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]