Search

Background: Getting a diagnosis of dementia does not equate to equitable access to care. People with dementia and unpaid carers face many barriers to care, which can vary within, and across, different countries and cultures. With little evidence across different countries, the aim of this scoping exercise was to identify the different and similar types of inequalities in dementia across Europe, and provide recommendations for addressing these. Methods: We conducted a brief online survey with INTERDEM and INTERDEM Academy members across Europe, and with members of Alzheimer Europe's European Working Group of People with Dementia and Carers in February and March 2023. Members were asked about whether inequalities in dementia care existed within their country; if yes, to highlight three key inequalities. Responses on barriers were coded into groups, and frequencies of inequalities were calculated. Highlighted inequalities were discussed and prioritised at face‐to‐face and virtual consensus meetings in England, Ireland, Italy, and Poland, involving people with dementia, unpaid carers, health and social care providers, and non‐profit organisations. Results: Forty‐nine academics, PhD students, people with dementia and unpaid carers from 10 countries (Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Malta, Netherlands, UK) completed the survey. The most frequently identified inequalities focused on unawareness and lack of information, higher level system issues (i.e. lack of communication among care professionals), lack of service suitability, and stigma. Other barriers included workforce training and knowledge, financial costs, culture and language, lack of single‐point‐of‐contact person, age, and living location/postcode lottery. There was general consensus among people living dementia and care providers of unawareness as a key barrier in different European countries, with varied priorities in Ireland depending on geographical location. Conclusions: These findings provide a first insight on dementia inequalities across Europe, generate cross‐country learnings on how to address these inequalities in dementia, and can underpin further solution‐focused research that informs policy and key decision makers to implement changes. Key points: There are numerous similar barriers to accessing dementia care across different European countries.Some of the key challenges to equitable dementia care are lack of workforce knowledge, lack of information, stigma, financial barriers, and lack of communication among care professionals.Cultural challenges, postcode lottery, and service suitability were also raised as key barriers to dementia care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with dementia and unpaid carers need to go through a social care or carers needs assessment to access and receive subsidised or fully-funded social care. With no previous evidence, this qualitative study aimed to provide insights into the access to, experiences of receiving and conducting social care or carers needs assessments, and access to social care. Methods: Unpaid carers of people with dementia and professionals conducting social care or carers needs assessment living or working in England were interviewed remotely about their experiences between April and August 2023. Topic guides were co-produced with two unpaid carers, and both were supported to code anonymised transcripts. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Findings: Twenty-seven unpaid carers (n = 21) and professionals (n = 6) participated. Four themes were generated: (1) Issues with accessing needs assessments, not the process; (2) Knowledge of needs assessments and the health and social care system; (3) Expectations of unpaid carers; and (4) Post-assessment unmet needs. The most prominent barriers unpaid carers and their relatives with dementia encountered were awareness of and access to needs assessment. Unpaid carers were mostly unaware of the existence and entitlement to a needs assessment, and sometimes realised they had participated in one without their knowledge. Professionals described the pressures on their time and the lack of financial resources within services. Conclusions: To facilitate improved access to dementia care and support for carers, the pathway to accessing needs assessments needs to be clearer, with better integration and communication between health and social care. [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]

The aim of this 3-UK-nation online survey was to explore the impact of the cost of living crisis on the lives of people with dementia and their carers, specifically on their ability to access social care and support services, and the contributions of gender and ethnic background. A 3-UK-nation (England, Wales, Northern Ireland) 31-item online survey was conducted in October 2022 asking people with dementia, carers, and people knowing but not caring for someone with dementia about social care and support service access, cost of living crisis, and changes due to the cost of living crisis. Frequency analysis and Chi-square analysis were employed to assess whether forms of payment for services varied by gender. Pearson correlation analysis and binary logistic regression were used to assess whether gender and ethnicity were associated with struggling to pay for care since the crisis. A total of 1,095 people with dementia, unpaid carers, and people who knew but not cared for someone with dementia participated. Of those, 745 people with dementia were utilising community-based social care and support services. Twenty percent of those with complete data had reduced their spending on care services since the crisis. Men and those from non-white ethnic backgrounds were at significantly increased odds of struggling to pay for care services. The cost of living crisis has led to exacerbated inequalities in accessing and using dementia care. Men and those from non-white ethnic backgrounds in particular need to receive greater support in accessing care. [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]

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]

Healthcare services for people living with dementia (PLWD) are stretched, and government promises of increased funding remain undelivered. With the UK dementia population to surpass 1 million by 2024, and dementia care costs predicted to almost treble by 2040, it is essential we understand differences in healthcare use among PLWD. This study aimed to explore social and spatial variations in healthcare use among people diagnosed with dementia (2002–2016). Data were derived from Electronic Health Records of Clinical Practice Research Datalink GP patients in England (n = 142,302). To standardise healthcare contacts, rates of healthcare contacts per year were calculated for three primary (GP observations and medications) and three secondary healthcare types [Accident & Emergency (A&E) attendances and, emergency and elective hospital admissions]. Fully-adjusted generalised linear regression models were used to identify healthcare use variation by social and spatial groups. Twelve models were generated, one for each healthcare type in early- and late-onset populations separately. This study highlights numerous social and spatial variations in healthcare use among PLWD. Among PLWD, several groups tended to have healthcare service use more closely associated with negative outcomes, including a greater likelihood of A&E attendances and emergency and elective hospital admissions. These groups include: men, people from White ethnicity groups and people from more deprived and rural areas. Systemic and social measures are needed to reduce variations in healthcare use inequalities in PWLD. These include greater healthcare continuity, health checks and medicines reviews, culturally appropriate services, better and more accessible treatment and improved infrastructure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Previous reviews of care planning (CP) interventions in care homes focus on higher quality research methodologies and exclusively consider advanced care planning (ACP), thereby excluding many intervention-based studies that could inform current practice. CP is concerned with residents' current circumstances while ACP focuses on expressing preferences which relate to future care decisions. Objectives: To identify, map and summarise studies reporting CP interventions for older people in care homes. Methods: Seven electronic databases were searched from 1 January 2012 until 1 January 2022. Studies of CP interventions, targeted at older people (>60 years), whose primary place of residence was a care home, were eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts of 3778 articles. Following a full-text review of 404 articles, data from 112 eligible articles were extracted using a predefined data extraction form. Findings: Studies were conducted in 25 countries and the majority of studies took place in the United States, Australia and the UK. Most interventions occurred within nursing homes (61%, 68/112). More than 90% of interventions (93%, 104/112) targeted staff, and training was the most common focus (80%, 83/104), although only one included training for ancillary staff (such as cleaners and caterers). Only a third of the studies (35%, 39/112) involved family and friends, and 62% (69/112) described interventions to improve CP practices through multiple means. Limitations: Only papers written in English were included, so potentially relevant studies may have been omitted. Implications: Two groups of people - ancillary workers and family and friends - who could play a valuable role in CP were often not included in CP interventions. These oversights should be addressed in future research. [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]

The COVID‐19 pandemic has significantly limited access to health and social care support systems for people with dementia and their carers, compounding the severe social restrictions. The aim of this study was to investigate the experiences of COVID‐19 among community‐dwelling people with dementia and their informal carers in Italy. Specifically, we focused on access to community‐based services and adopted solutions to provide support and care during exceptional times. Informal carers, caring for someone with dementia and attending community‐based services in Italy, participated in remote semi‐structured interviews between October and November 2020. Participants were asked about the effects of social isolation and closure of in‐person services on their daily lives as well as the challenges of dementia care. Transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. 22 informal carers were interviewed. Three themes emerged: (1) Disruptions to people with dementia's lives and health; (2) COVID‐19 as an additional stressor for carers; and (3) New ways of caring for people with dementia during COVID‐19. Face‐to‐face social care and social support services were suddenly interrupted and restrictions on social distancing were introduced, thus leading to people with dementia's impaired health and increased behavioural and psychological symptoms. Not only the amount but also the intensity of care increased, with no chance of respite for informal carers. Overall remote activities provided participants with emotional and social benefits, while allowing the continuity of relationships with services staff and users and of care. However, according to carers, a combination of virtual and face‐to‐face activities could better counterbalance the multiple adverse outcomes of COVID‐19. Public health measures should be designed carefully to consider the safety needs and the physical, psychological and social needs of people with dementia. Within a holistic care approach, social care services need to be enabled better to guarantee high‐quality care even during pandemic times. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to explore how formal social support changed after implementation of the COVID-19 public health measures and how these restrictions affected people living with dementia and their informal carers in Australia. Sixteen informal carers and two people living with dementia were interviewed between August and November 2020. Participants were asked about their experiences of the pandemic and the impact that the restrictions had on their lives and care. Thematic analysis identified four overarching themes describing (a) prepandemic limitations of the aged care system, (b) the aged care system's response to the COVID-19 restrictions, (c) changes affecting informal carers, and (d) the challenges faced by people living with dementia. The findings highlighted the challenges faced by the Australian aged care system before the pandemic and the additional burden placed on informal carers who supported people living with dementia across residential and home settings during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The aim of this study was to explore the impact of the pandemic on the emotional and mental well‐being of family carers, care home staff and residents, in light of changing restrictions, increased testing and vaccination rollout in the UK. Design Longitudinal, qualitative semi‐structured interview study. Methods: Remote semi‐structured interviews were conducted with family carers of care home residents with dementia and care home staff from different care homes across the UK. Baseline and follow‐up interviews were conducted in October/November 2020 and March 2021, respectively. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis involving members of the public with caring experiences. Results: In all, 42 family carers and care home staff participated at baseline, with 20 family carers and staff followed up. We identified four themes: (1) Developing anger and frustration; (2) Impact on relationships; (3) Stress and burnout; and (4) Behavioural changes, and perceived impact on residents. The mental health of everyone involved, including family carers, care home staff and residents, has been negatively affected, and relationships between family carers and staff have been severely strained. There was a general lack of adequate mental health support, with little relief. Conclusions: The pandemic has had a detrimental impact on the lives of those surrounding care homes—from residents and staff to family carers. Consideration should be given on how to best support the mental health needs of all three groups, by providing adequate easily accessible mental health care for all. This should also focus on rebuilding the relationships between family carers and care home staff. Impact This is the first paper to highlight the effects of the long‐lasting and miscommunicated restrictions on residents, carers and care home staff, and highlight the urgent need for continued mental health support. [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]

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: People with dementia (PwD) require an increasing degree of assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs), and dependency may negatively impact on their well-being. However, it remains unclear which activities are impaired at each stage of dementia and to what extent this is associated with variations in quality of life (QoL) across the different stages, which were the two objectives of this study. Methods: The sample comprised 122 PwD, and their carers, either living at home or recently admitted to long-term care. Measures of cognition and QoL were completed by the PwD and proxy measures of psychopathology, depression, ADLs and QoL were recorded. Using frequency, correlation and multiple regression analysis, data were analysed for the number of ADL impairments across mild, moderate and severe dementia and for the factors impacting on QoL. Results: ADL performance deteriorates differently for individual activities, with some ADLs showing impairment in mild dementia, including dressing, whereas others only deteriorate later on, including feeding. This decline may be seen in the degree to which carers perceive ADLs to explain the QoL of the PwD, with more ADLs associated with QoL in severe dementia. Results of the regression analysis showed that total ADL performance however was only impacting on QoL in moderate dementia. Conclusion: Knowledge about performance deterioration in different ADLs has implications for designing interventions to address specific activities at different stages of the disease. Furthermore, findings suggest that different factors are important to consider when trying to improve or maintain QoL at different stages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To explore associations between carer burden and characteristics of (1) the informal carer, (2) the person with dementia, and (3) the care support network in 8 European countries. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting People with dementia judged at risk of admission to long-term care (LTC) facilities in 8 European countries (Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom). Participants A total of 1223 people with dementia supported by community services at home or receiving day care or respite care and their informal carers. Measurements Variables regarding the informal carer included familial relationship and living situation. Variables relating to the person with dementia included cognitive functioning (S-MMSE), neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI-Q), depressive symptoms (Cornell depression scale), comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index), and physical functioning (Katz Activity of Daily Living [ADL] Index). The care support network was measured using hours of caregiving (ADLs, instrumental ADLs [IADLs], supervision), additional informal care support, and service receipt (home care, day care). Experience of carer burden was recorded using the Zarit Burden Interview. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine factors associated with high carer burden. Results Carer burden was highest in Estonia (mean 39.7/88) and lowest in the Netherlands (mean 26.5/88). High burden was significantly associated with characteristics of the informal carer (family relationship, specifically wives or daughters), of the person with dementia (physical dependency in ADLs; neuropsychiatric symptoms, in particular nighttime behaviors and irritability), the care support network (hours of caregiving supervision; receipt of other informal care support) and country of residence. Conclusion A range of factors are associated with burden in informal carers of people with dementia judged to be on the margins of LTC. Support for informal carers needs to take account of gender differences. The dual challenges of distressed behaviors and difficulties in ADLs by the person with dementia may be addressed by specific nonpharmacological interventions focusing on both elements. The potential protective effect of additional informal support to carers highlights the importance of peer support or better targeted home support services. The implementation of appropriate and tailored interventions to reduce burden by supporting informal carers may enable people with dementia to remain at home for longer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]