Caring for patients with dementia: How good is the quality of care? results from three health systems

Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California, United States
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (Impact Factor: 4.22). 09/2007; 55(8):1260-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01249.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To describe the quality of dementia care within one U.S. metropolitan area and to investigate associations between variations in quality and patient, caregiver, and health system characteristics.
Observational, cross-sectional.
Three hundred eighty-seven patient-caregiver pairs from three healthcare organizations
Using caregiver surveys and medical record abstraction to assess 18 dementia care processes drawn from existing guidelines, the proportion adherent to each care process was calculated, as well as mean percentages of adherence aggregated within four care dimensions: assessment (6 processes), treatment (6 processes), education and support (3 processes), and safety (3 processes). For each dimension, associations between adherence and patient, caregiver, and health system characteristics were investigated using multivariable models.
Adherence ranged from 9% to 79% for the 18 individual care processes; 11 processes had less than 40% adherence. Mean percentage adherence across the four care dimensions was 37% for assessment, 33% for treatment, 52% for education and support, and 21% for safety. Higher comorbidity was associated with greater adherence across all four dimensions, whereas greater caregiver knowledge (in particular, one item) was associated with higher care quality in three of four care dimensions. For selected dimensions, greater adherence was also associated with greater dementia severity and with more geriatrics or neurologist visits.
In general, dementia care quality has considerable room for improvement. Although greater comorbidity and dementia severity were associated with better quality, caregiver knowledge was the most consistent caregiver characteristic associated with better adherence. These findings offer opportunities for targeting low quality and suggest potential focused interventions.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The increasing cost of health care combined with expensive new drugs and diagnostics is leading to more frequent gaps between regulatory and subsequent reimbursement approval decisions. As a result, persons with Alzheimer's disease may have difficulty accessing the benefit of medical advances. In contrast to the long history and established structure for drug approval, payer decision making is dispersed, not standardized, and perspectives on necessary evidence and the evaluation of this evidence differ and are often poorly defined. Particularly challenging is how to demonstrate the value of drugs and diagnostics for patients who do not yet have significant functional decline. Although discussions to develop consensus continue, clinical trials should begin to incorporate health system and patient-oriented outcomes. In some situations, additional studies designed to demonstrate value and comparative effectiveness will be needed. Such studies should examine outcomes of representative populations in community settings. To assure scientific advances in diagnosis and treatment benefit in patients, developing evidence to support reimbursement will become as important as obtaining regulatory approval.
    Alzheimer's & dementia: the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 07/2014; 10(4):503-8. DOI:10.1016/j.jalz.2014.05.003 · 17.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives To characterize caregiver strain, depressive symptoms, and self-efficacy for managing dementia-related problems and the relationship between these and referring provider type.DesignCross-sectional observational cohort.SettingUrban academic medical center.ParticipantsCaregivers of community-dwelling adults with dementia referred to a dementia care management program.MeasurementsCaregivers were surveyed and completed the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) about themselves; the Modified Caregiver Strain Index; the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire, which measures patient symptom severity and related caregiver distress; and a nine-item caregiver self-efficacy scale developed for the study.ResultsOf 307 patient–caregiver dyads surveyed over a 1-year period, 32% of caregivers reported confidence in managing dementia-related problems, 19% knew how to access community services to help provide care, and 28% agreed that the individual's provider helped them work through dementia care problems. Thirty-eight percent reported high levels of caregiver strain, and 15% reported moderate to severe depressive symptoms. Caregivers of individuals referred by geriatricians more often reported having a healthcare professional to help work through dementia care problems than those referred by internists, family physicians, or other specialists, but self-efficacy did not differ. Low caregiver self-efficacy was associated with higher caregiver strain, more caregiver depressive symptoms, and caring for an individual with more-severe behavioral symptoms.Conclusion Most caregivers perceived inadequate support from the individual's provider in managing dementia-related problems, reported strain, and had low confidence in managing caregiving. New models of care are needed to address the complex care needs of individuals with dementia and their caregivers.
    Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 02/2015; 63(2). DOI:10.1111/jgs.13251 · 4.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dementia is a growing problem, causing substantial burden for patients, their families, and society. General practitioners (GPs) play an important role in diagnosing and managing dementia; however, there are gaps between recommended and current practice. The aim of this study was to explore GPs' reported practice in diagnosing and managing dementia and to describe, in theoretical terms, the proposed explanations for practice that was and was not consistent with evidence-based guidelines. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs in Victoria, Australia. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) guided data collection and analysis. Interviews explored the factors hindering and enabling achievement of 13 recommended behaviours. Data were analysed using content and thematic analysis. This paper presents an in-depth description of the factors influencing two behaviours, assessing co-morbid depression using a validated tool, and conducting a formal cognitive assessment using a validated scale. A total of 30 GPs were interviewed. Most GPs reported that they did not assess for co-morbid depression using a validated tool as per recommended guidance. Barriers included the belief that depression can be adequately assessed using general clinical indicators and that validated tools provide little additional information (theoretical domain of 'Beliefs about consequences'); discomfort in using validated tools ('Emotion'), possibly due to limited training and confidence ('Skills'; 'Beliefs about capabilities'); limited awareness of the need for, and forgetting to conduct, a depression assessment ('Knowledge'; 'Memory, attention and decision processes'). Most reported practising in a manner consistent with the recommendation that a formal cognitive assessment using a validated scale be undertaken. Key factors enabling this were having an awareness of the need to conduct a cognitive assessment ('Knowledge'); possessing the necessary skills and confidence ('Skills'; 'Beliefs about capabilities'); and having adequate time and resources ('Environmental context and resources'). This is the first study to our knowledge to use a theoretical approach to investigate the barriers and enablers to guideline-recommended diagnosis and management of dementia in general practice. It has identified key factors likely to explain GPs' uptake of the guidelines. The results have informed the design of an intervention aimed at supporting practice change in line with dementia guidelines, which is currently being evaluated in a cluster randomised trial.
    Implementation Science 03/2014; 9(1):31. DOI:10.1186/1748-5908-9-31 · 3.47 Impact Factor


Available from
May 29, 2014