Search

Objectives: The primary aim of this pragmatic stepped‐wedge cluster RCT was to determine the efficacy of a co‐designed dementia specialist training program (the PITCH program) for home care workers (HCWs) to improve their confidence and knowledge when providing care for clients living with dementia. Methods: HCWs who provided care to clients with dementia were recruited from seven home care service provider organisations in Australia between July 2019 and May 2022, and randomised into one of 18 clusters. The primary outcome was HCW's sense of self‐competence in providing care services to people living with dementia at 6 months post PITCH training measured by the Sense of Competence in Dementia Care Staff (SCIDS) Scale. Results: Two hundred and thirteen HCWS completed baseline assessment and almost half (48.4%) completed all three study assessments. HCWs in clusters that received PITCH training had significantly higher sense of competence (measured by SCIDS) than those who had not received PITCH training. Post hoc analysis revealed that face‐to‐face PITCH training consistently resulted in improvements in the HCWs sense of competence, dementia attitudes and knowledge when compared to online training and when compared to no training. PITCH training had no effect on the sense of strain HCWs felt in delivering dementia care. Conclusions: Given the majority of care for people living with dementia is provided at home by family carers supported by HCWs, it is essential that HCWs receive training that improves their skills in dementia care. This study is an important step towards better care at home for people living with dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Our objective was to explore what people receiving and providing care consider to be 'good' in-home care for people living with dementia.Methods: We conducted 36 in-depth interviews and two focus groups with key stakeholders in Australia in the first quarter of 2018. Participants included those receiving care (4 people living with dementia, 15 family carers) or providing care (9 case managers, 5 service managers, 10 home care workers). Qualitative thematic analysis was guided by Braun and Clarke's six-step approach.Results: Consensus was reached across all groups on five themes considered as important for good in-home dementia care: 1) Home care workers' understanding of dementia and its impact; 2) Home care workers' demonstrating person-centred care and empathy in their care relationship with their client; 3) Good relationships and communication between care worker, person with dementia and family carers; 4) Home care workers' knowing positive practical strategies for changed behaviours; 5) Effective workplace policies and workforce culture. The results contributed to the co-design of a dementia specific training program for home care workers.Conclusions: It is crucial to consider the views and opinions of each stakeholder group involved in providing/receiving dementia care from home care workers, to inform workforce training, education program design and service design. Results can be used to inform and empower home care providers, policy, and related decision makers to guide the delivery of improved home care services.Trial Registration: ACTRN 12619000251123 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global population ageing has meant a rapid increase in the numbers of older people with dementia, most of whom live in their own homes. Staying at home is an important determinant of health and well‐being. As care needs increase, the quality of community support which older people receive directly influences their capacity to remain in their own homes. While many are supported informally by family carers, formal support provided by home care workers often enables them to remain at home for longer period. However, providing community‐based care for people with dementia can be challenging. Workers often lack training in dementia‐specific care for clients with increasingly complex needs, and typically work without direct supervision. As the demand for person‐centred home care for people with dementia increases, specialist dementia training for home care workers is urgently needed. In this qualitative study, we used in‐depth interviews of a purposive sample, comprising 15 family carers and four older people with dementia, to understand the experience of receiving community care. Data analysis was guided by Braun and Clarke's approach to thematic analysis and revealed the following five overlapping themes, relating to home care workers' understanding of dementia, person‐centred care, communication and rapport, mutual collaboration, and the influence of organisational constraints on continuity of care. Although participants acknowledged that service providers operated under challenging circumstances, they were frustrated with home care workers' lack of dementia knowledge and inconsistent staff rostering. Conversely, an understanding of the lived experience of dementia, effective communication and rapport, and continuity of care contributed significantly to a positive experience of receiving care. The findings of this study will be used to inform the essential elements of a training program aimed at enabling and empowering a skilled, specialist home care workforce to support older people with dementia to live well at home for as long as possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim This study aimed to compare perceptions about elder abuse among health professionals and students in the same health disciplines. Methods The Caregiving Scenario Questionnaire ( CSQ) was disseminated to Australian health professionals from two metropolitan health services and to university health care students. Results One hundred and twenty health professionals and 127 students returned surveys. Significantly more students than health professionals identified locking someone in the house alone all day and restraining someone in a chair as abusive. Conclusion There is a need for further definition clarification and education about detection and management of elder abuse for health students and professionals in Australia. Student education should include consideration of the real-life situations likely to be encountered in practice. Education for both students and health professionals should include strategies for carers to manage difficult situations such as the one described in the CSQ. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dementia is the second leading cause of disease burden in Australia. We aimed to calculate the population attributable fractions (PAFs) of dementia attributable to 11 of 12 previously identified potentially modifiable health and social risk factors (less education, hearing loss, hypertension, obesity, smoking, depression, social isolation, physical inactivity, diabetes, alcohol excess, air pollution, and traumatic brain injury), for Australians overall and three population groups (First Nations, and those of European and Asian ancestry)., Methods: We calculated the prevalence of dementia risk factors (excluding traumatic brain injury) and PAFs, adjusted for communality, from the cross-sectional National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey (2018-19), National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Survey (2014-15), National Health Survey (2017-18), and General Social Survey (2014) conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. We conducted sensitivity analyses using proxy estimates for traumatic brain injury (12th known risk factor) for which national data were not available., Findings: A large proportion (38·2%, 95% CI 37·2-39·2) of dementia in Australia was theoretically attributable to the 11 risk factors; 44·9% (43·1-46·7) for First Nations Australians, 36·4% (34·8-38·1) for European ancestry, and 33·6% (30·1-37·2) for Asian ancestry. Including traumatic brain injury increased the PAF to 40·6% (39·6-41·6) for all Australians. Physical inactivity (8·3%, 7·5-9·2), hearing loss (7·0%, 6·4-7·6), and obesity (6·6%, 6·0-7·3) accounted for approximately half of the total PAF estimates across Australia, and for all three population groups., Interpretation: Our PAF estimates indicate a substantial proportion of dementia in Australia is potentially preventable, which is broadly consistent with global trends and results from other countries. The highest potential for dementia prevention was among First Nations Australians, reflecting the enduring effect of upstream social, political, environmental, and economic disadvantage, leading to greater life-course exposure to dementia risk factors. Although there were common dementia risk factors across different population groups, prevention strategies should be informed by community consultation and be culturally and linguistically appropriate., Funding: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and University College London Hospitals' National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre, and North Thames NIHR Applied Research Collaboration., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Importance: The clinical value of current multifactorial algorithms for individualized assessment of dementia risk remains unclear., Objective: To evaluate the clinical value associated with 4 widely used dementia risk scores in estimating 10-year dementia risk., Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective population-based UK Biobank cohort study assessed 4 dementia risk scores at baseline (2006-2010) and ascertained incident dementia during the following 10 years. Replication with a 20-year follow-up was based on the British Whitehall II study. For both analyses, participants who had no dementia at baseline, had complete data on at least 1 dementia risk score, and were linked to electronic health records from hospitalizations or mortality were included. Data analysis was conducted from July 5, 2022, to April 20, 2023., Exposures: Four existing dementia risk scores: the Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging and Dementia (CAIDE)-Clinical score, the CAIDE-APOE-supplemented score, the Brief Dementia Screening Indicator (BDSI), and the Australian National University Alzheimer Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Dementia was ascertained from linked electronic health records. To evaluate how well each score predicted the 10-year risk of dementia, concordance (C) statistics, detection rate, false-positive rate, and the ratio of true to false positives were calculated for each risk score and for a model including age alone., Results: Of 465 929 UK Biobank participants without dementia at baseline (mean [SD] age, 56.5 [8.1] years; range, 38-73 years; 252 778 [54.3%] female participants), 3421 were diagnosed with dementia at follow-up (7.5 per 10 000 person-years). If the threshold for a positive test result was calibrated to achieve a 5% false-positive rate, all 4 risk scores detected 9% to 16% of incident dementia and therefore missed 84% to 91% (failure rate). The corresponding failure rate was 84% for a model that included age only. For a positive test result calibrated to detect at least half of future incident dementia, the ratio of true to false positives ranged between 1 to 66 (for CAIDE-APOE-supplemented) and 1 to 116 (for ANU-ADRI). For age alone, the ratio was 1 to 43. The C statistic was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.65-0.67) for the CAIDE clinical version, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.72-0.73) for the CAIDE-APOE-supplemented, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.67-0.69) for BDSI, 0.59 (95% CI, 0.58-0.60) for ANU-ADRI, and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.79-0.80) for age alone. Similar C statistics were seen for 20-year dementia risk in the Whitehall II study cohort, which included 4865 participants (mean [SD] age, 54.9 [5.9] years; 1342 [27.6%] female participants). In a subgroup analysis of same-aged participants aged 65 (±1) years, discriminatory capacity of risk scores was low (C statistics between 0.52 and 0.60)., Conclusions and Relevance: In these cohort studies, individualized assessments of dementia risk using existing risk prediction scores had high error rates. These findings suggest that the scores were of limited value in targeting people for dementia prevention. Further research is needed to develop more accurate algorithms for estimation of dementia risk.

Objectives: We wished to clarify the link between bilingualism and cognitive decline, and examine whether improved executive function due to bilingualism may be a factor in preventing cognitive decline., Methods: We used the Australian Longitudinal Study of Ageing which collected data on 2087 participants aged over 65 over 20 years. We compared baseline demographics, health, and social characteristics between bilingual and non-bilingual participants. We used linear mixed models analysis to explore the effect of bilingualism on MMSE score over time and linear regression to explore the effect of bilingualism on baseline MMSE scores, controlling for pre-specified potential confounders., Results: Bilingual participants had lower baseline MMSE scores than the non-bilingual population (mean difference = -2.3 points; 95% confidence intervals = 1.56-2.90). This was fully explained by education and National Adult Reading Test scores (17.4; standard deviation [SD] =7.7 versus 28.1; SD = 8.2) which also partly explained baseline executive function test scores differences. Bilingual and non-bilingual participants did not differ in MMSE decline over time (-0.33 points, P = 0.31) nor on baseline tests of executive function (-0.26, P = 0.051)., Conclusions: In this cohort, education rather than bilingualism was a predictor of MMSE score, and being bilingual did not protect from cognitive decline. We conclude that bilingualism is complex, and when it is not the result of greater educational attainment, it does not always protect from cognitive decline. Neuroprotective effects of bilingualism over time may be attributable to the precise patterns of language use but not to bilingualism per se., (Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

The number of people with dementia from minority ethnic (ME) groups in western countries is projected to rise dramatically, and they may be less able to access dementia services. To compare the use of health and social services, treatments for dementia and dementia research between different ethnic groups. A systematic review of 33 articles fitting predetermined criteria. Compatible results were pooled in a meta-analysis. ME people with dementia were more cognitively impaired, and Hispanic people reported a longer duration of memory loss than non-ME people, at the time of referral to diagnostic dementia services in the United States and Australia {pooled weighted mean difference on Mini-Mental State Examination = 3.48 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.87-4.09); z = 11.19, p <0.0001; N = 2,090}. These differences remained after controlling for premorbid level of education. The use of community social services did not vary between ME and non-ME people with dementia, but African Americans were 30% less likely to be prescribed cholinesterase inhibitors {odds ratio (OR) 0.7 [0.6-0.9]; z = -3.1, p = 0.002; N = 175}, and ME groups were underrepresented in U.S. dementia drug trials. ME people with dementia were 40% less likely to enter 24-hour care (pooled hazard ratio 0.59 [95% CI: 0.52-0.69]; z = -7.15, p <0.0001; N = 12,053). The authors found consistent evidence, mostly from the United States, that ME people accessed diagnostic services later in their illness, and once they received a diagnosis, were less likely to access antidementia medication, research trials, and 24-hour care. Increasing community engagement and specific recruitment strategies for ME groups might help address inequalities, and these need to be evaluated. More research is also needed to evaluate ME access to dementia services outside the United States.