Search

Payment reforms are frequently implemented alongside service delivery reforms, thus rendering it difficult to disentangle their impact. This scoping review aims to link alternative payment arrangements within their context of service delivery, to assess their impact on quality of chronic care, and to disentangle, where possible, the impact of payment reforms from changes to service delivery. A search of literature published between 2013 and 2022 resulted in 34 relevant articles across five types of payment models: capitation/global budget (n = 13), pay-for-coordination (n = 10), shared savings/shared risk (n = 6), blended capitation (n = 3), and bundled payments (n = 1). The certainty of evidence was generally low due to biases associated with voluntary participation in reforms. This scoping review finds that population-based payment reforms are better suited for collaborative, person-centred approaches of service delivery spanning settings and providers, but also highlights the need for a wider evidence base of studies disentangling the impact of financing from service delivery reforms. Limited evidence disentangling the two suggests that transforming service delivery to a team-based model of care alongside a purchasing reform shifting to blended capitation was more impactful in improving quality of chronic care, than the individual components of payment and service delivery. Further comparative studies employing causal inference methods, accounting for biases and quantifying aspects of service delivery, are needed to better disentangle the mechanisms impacting quality of care., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Limited evidence exists on how people living with dementia and their family/unpaid carers navigate care and support in India., Aim: This study used case vignettes to illustrate likely pathways to care for dementia, from receiving a diagnosis to long-term support, in India and to highlight gaps and challenges associated with current care provision for persons living with dementia., Methods: As part of the Strengthening Responses to Dementia in Developing Countries (STRiDE) project, and to contribute to an analysis of dementia care policies and systems in India, case vignettes were used to illustrate the diverse situations that people with dementia and their families may experience when seeking care in the Indian context. Eight hypothetical, but realistic cases of people with dementia were created by a multi-disciplinary team with experience in dementia care in India, to map out the likely care journeys of each case., Results: Investigating eight diverse care trajectories of people living with dementia highlighted important patterns relevant to the Indian context. We identified delays in dementia diagnosis to be attributed to low awareness of dementia among the general public and medical professionals in addition to a critical shortage of specialist services involved in facilitating dementia diagnosis. Post-diagnosis, support was recognized as limited and associated with considerable out-of-pocket (OOP) costs. Families primarily provide long-term care for people with dementia till end of life., Conclusions and Recommendations: Several steps need to be taken in order to improve dementia care in India. Increasing dementia awareness among both medical professionals and general public is essential. Shortages in dementia specialists can be addressed in part through appropriate task shifting. Lastly, more research is needed to develop evidence-based community interventions to support informal care provision for persons with dementia in India., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background and Objectives: Despite the rapid increase in the number of people living with dementia in Brazil, dementia care is limited. This study describes how people living with dementia and their carers access care, treatment, and support, and identifies what characteristics are likely to enable or prevent access., Research Design and Methods: We created 10 vignettes to illustrate fictitious but realistic scenarios involving people living with dementia in Brazil. The vignettes explore a combination of socioeconomic and demographic variables. They were completed using an in-depth desk review of the dementia care landscape in Brazil; a Strengths, Opportunities, Weaknesses, and Threats (SWOT) analysis of the desk review; and expert knowledge. The analysis focused on identifying common sources of service provision, barriers of access to care and support, and specific issues experienced by some population groups., Findings: Access to a dementia diagnosis, care, and support for people living with dementia in Brazil is limited. Demographic and socio-economic circumstances play a role in determining the type of services to which a person might have access. Poor knowledge about dementia, lack of capacity in the health system, and lack of formal long-term care support are among the identified barriers to accessing timely diagnosis, care, and support in the country., Discussion and Implications: Understanding the barriers and facilitators of access to diagnosis, treatment, and support for people with dementia and families with different demographic and socioeconomic characteristics is crucial for designing dementia policies that are context-specific and responsive to the care needs of different socioeconomic groups in Brazil., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objectives: The STrAtegies for RelaTives (START) intervention is effective and cost-effective in supporting family carers of people with dementia. It is currently not available to all eligible carers in England. What would be the impacts on service costs and carer health-related quality of life if START was provided to all eligible carers in England, currently and in future?, Methods: Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness data from a previously conducted randomised controlled trial were combined with current and future projections of numbers of people with newly diagnosed dementia to estimate overall and component costs and health-related quality of life outcomes between 2015 (base year for projections) and 2040., Results: Scaling-up START requires investments increasing annually but would lead to significant savings in health and social care costs. Family carers of people with dementia would experience improvements in mental health and quality of life, with clinical effects lasting at least 6 years. Scaling up the START intervention to eligible carers was estimated to cost £9.4 million in 2020, but these costs would lead to annual savings of £68 million, and total annual quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains of 1247. Although the costs of START would increase to £19.8 million in 2040, savings would rise to £142.7 million and Quality adjusted life years gained to 1883., Conclusions: Scaling-up START for family carers of people with dementia in England would improve the lives of family carers and reduce public sector costs. Family carers play a vital part in dementia care; evidence-based interventions that help them to maintain this role, such as START, should be available across the country., (© 2024 The Authors. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: More people with dementia live in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) than in high-income countries, but best-practice care recommendations are often based on studies from high-income countries. We aimed to map the available evidence on dementia interventions in LMICs., Methods: We systematically mapped available evidence on interventions that aimed to improve the lives of people with dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and/or their carers in LMICs (registered on PROSPERO: CRD42018106206). We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2008 and 2018. We searched 11 electronic academic and grey literature databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, Global Health, World Health Organization Global Index Medicus, Virtual Health Library, Cochrane CENTRAL, Social Care Online, BASE, MODEM Toolkit) and examined the number and characteristics of RCTs according to intervention type. We used the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool to assess the risk of bias., Results: We included 340 RCTs with 29,882 (median, 68) participants, published 2008-2018. Over two-thirds of the studies were conducted in China (n = 237, 69.7%). Ten LMICs accounted for 95.9% of included RCTs. The largest category of interventions was Traditional Chinese Medicine (n = 149, 43.8%), followed by Western medicine pharmaceuticals (n = 109, 32.1%), supplements (n = 43, 12.6%), and structured therapeutic psychosocial interventions (n = 37, 10.9%). Overall risk of bias was judged to be high for 201 RCTs (59.1%), moderate for 136 (40.0%), and low for 3 (0.9%)., Conclusions: Evidence-generation on interventions for people with dementia or MCI and/or their carers in LMICs is concentrated in just a few countries, with no RCTs reported in the vast majority of LMICs. The body of evidence is skewed towards selected interventions and overall subject to high risk of bias. There is a need for a more coordinated approach to robust evidence-generation for LMICs., (© 2023 The Authors. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Visiting restrictions in care homes in England and many comparable countries during the Covid-19 pandemic were extensive and prolonged. We examined how care home managers experienced, understood and responded to the national care home visiting guidance in England in developing their visiting policies., Methods: A diverse sample of 121 care home managers across England, recruited through varied sources including the NIHR ENRICH network of care homes, completed a 10-item qualitative survey. Follow-up, in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with a purposive sub-sample of 40 managers. Data were analysed thematically using Framework, a theoretically and methodologically flexible tool for data analysis in multiple researcher teams., Findings: Some viewed the national guidance positively; as supporting the restrictive measures they felt necessary to protect residents and staff from infection, or as setting a broad policy framework while allowing local discretion. More commonly, however, managers experienced challenges. These included the guidance being issued late; the initial document and frequent, media-led updates not being user-friendly; important gaps, particularly in relation to dementia and the risks and harms associated with restrictions; guidance being unhelpfully open to interpretation while restrictive interpretations by regulators limited apparent scope for discretion; fragmented systems of local governance and poor central-local coordination; inconsistent access and quality of support from local regulators wider sources of information, advice and support that, while often valued, were experienced as uncoordinated, duplicative and sometimes confusing; and insufficient account taken of workforce challenges., Conclusions: Underlying many of the challenges experienced were structural issues, for which there have been longstanding calls for investment and strategic reform. For increasing sector resilience, these should be are urgently addressed. Future guidance would also be significantly strengthened by gathering better data, supporting well-facilitated peer exchange, engaging the sector more fully and dynamically in policy-making and learning from care home managers' and staff's experiences, particularly of assessing, managing and mitigating the wider risks and harms associated with visiting restrictions., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

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.

Objectives: With a lack of existing comprehensive reviews, the aim of this mixed-method systematic review was to synthesise the evidence on the early impacts of the pandemic on unpaid dementia carers across the globe., Methods: This review was registered on PROSPERO [CDR42021248050]. PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science were searched from 2020 to July 2021. Studies were included if they reported on the different impacts of the pandemic on unpaid dementia carers aged 18+, with papers published in English, German, Polish, or Spanish. A number of research team members were involved in the selection of studies following PRISMA guidance., Results: Thirty-six studies (43 papers) from 18 countries reported on the early impact of the pandemic on unpaid dementia carers. Impacts were noted on accessing care and support; carer burden; and well-being. Studies found that carers had limited access to care and support services, increased workload, enhanced feelings of social isolation, and reduced wellbeing. Specifically, reductions in access to care and support increased carer's unpaid caring tasks, removing any opportunities for temporary respite, and thus further increasing carer burden and reducing mental well-being in many., Conclusions: The needs of unpaid dementia carers appear to have increased during the pandemic, without adequate support provided. Policy initiatives need to enable better mental health support and formal care provision for unpaid carers and their relatives with dementia, whilst future research needs to explore the long-term implications of carer needs in light of care home restrictions and care delivery.

Cross-cultural adaptation is an important part of using validated questionnaires across countries and settings. Here we describe the cross-cultural process adopted in the STRiDE (STrengthening Responses to dementia in DEveloping countries) program. We adopted a cross-cultural adaptation process including forward translation, back translations, and cognitive interviews of the STRiDE toolkit. In total, 50 older adults and 41 carers across sites in Indonesia and South Africa participated in cognitive interviews; field notes and verbatim quotes are reported. We describe the cross-cultural adaptation process of the STRiDE toolkit. During the process, issues were identified with the translated toolkit, including aspects related to cultural appropriateness, terminology equivalence, and timings. The data demonstrate that a rigorous, yet pragmatic, cross-cultural adaptation process can be achieved even with limited resources. Our process should help the design and conduct of future dementia research in various contexts., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest to declare., (© 2022 The Authors. Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of Alzheimer's Association.)