Refine
Document Type
- Article (5)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Language
- English (6)
Has Fulltext
- yes (6)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (6)
Keywords
- - (3)
- dementia (3)
- Dementia (2)
- patient preferences (2)
- 4011404-1 (1)
- Advanced nursing practice (1)
- Advanced nursing roles (1)
- Alzheimer's (1)
- Alzheimer’s disease (1)
- Analytic hierarchy process (1)
- Collaborative care (1)
- Decision-making (1)
- Delegation (1)
- Dementia Care Management (1)
- General practitioner (1)
- Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluation (1)
- Menschen mit Demenz (1)
- Multi-criteria decision analysis (1)
- Multimorbidität (1)
- Nursing (1)
- Patient participation (1)
- Patient preferences (1)
- Patient-centered care (1)
- Person-centered care (1)
- Protocol (1)
- Substitution (1)
- Tasks (1)
- advanced nursing practice (1)
- advanced nursing roles (1)
- analytic hierarchy process (1)
- attributes (1)
- collaborative care (1)
- delegation (1)
- general practitioner (1)
- mild cognitive impairment (1)
- multi-criteria decision analysis (1)
- nursing (1)
- participatory research (1)
- patient participation (1)
- patient-centered care (1)
- person-centered care (1)
- qualitative research (1)
- shared decision making (1)
- substitution (1)
- survey (1)
- tasks (1)
Institute
Publisher
- BioMed Central (BMC) (2)
- MDPI (2)
Background
Person-Centered-Care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. Among People-living-with-Dementia (PlwD) data on quantitative, choice-based preferences, which would allow to quantify, weigh and rank patient-relevant elements of dementia-care, and identify most/least preferred choices, are limited. The Analytic-Hierarchy-Process (AHP) may be one approach to elicit quantitative, choice-based preferences with PlwD, due to simple pairwise comparisons of individual criteria from a complex decision-problem, e.g. health care decisions. Furthermore, data on congruence of patient preferences with physicians’ judgements for PCC are missing. If patient preferences and physicians’ judgements differ, provision of PCC becomes unlikely. An understanding of patient preferences compared to physician’s judgements will support the implementation of truly PCC, i.e. state of the art dementia-care aligned with patient preferences.
Methods
This mixed-methods-study will be based on the results from a previous systematic review and conducted in three phases: (I) literature-based key intervention-categories of PCC will be investigated during qualitative interviews with Dementia-Care-Managers (DCMs) and PlwD to identify actually patient-relevant (sub) criteria of PCC; (II) based on findings from phase I, an AHP-survey will be designed and pre-tested for face- and content-validity, and consistency during face-to-face “thinking-aloud”-interviews with PlwD and two expert panels (DCMs and physicians); (III) the developed survey will elicit patient preferences and physicians’ judgements for PCC. To assess individual importance weights for (sub) criteria in both groups, the Principal-Eigenvector-Method will be applied. Weights will be aggregated per group by Aggregation-of-Individual-Priorities-mode. Descriptive and interferential statistical analyses will be conducted to assess congruence of importance-weights between groups. Subgroup-analyses shall investigate participant-heterogeneities, sensitivity of AHP-results shall be tested by inclusion/exclusion of inconsistent respondents.
Discussion
Little research is published on quantitative, choice-based preferences in dementia care. We expect that (1) PlwD have preferences and can express these, (2) that the AHP is a suitable technique to elicit quantitative, choice-based preferences among PlwD, and (3) to identify a divergence between patient preferences and physicians’ judgements for PCC. With the help of the AHP-technique, which supports systematic decision-making including multiple criteria, it may be possible to involve PlwD in future care decisions (patient participation) and ensure implementation of truly Person-Centered-Dementia-Care.
Trial registration
Approval of the study was granted by the Ethics Committee at the University Medicine Greifswald the 09Apr2021 (Reg.-Nr.: BB 018–21, BB 018-21a, BB 018-21b).
Background
A redistribution of tasks between specialized nurses and primary care physicians, i.e., models of advanced nursing practice, has the potential to improve the treatment and care of the growing number of people with dementia (PwD). Especially in rural areas with limited access to primary care physicians and specialists, these models might improve PwD’s quality of life and well-being. However, such care models are not available in Germany in regular healthcare. This study examines the acceptance, safety, efficacy, and health economic efficiency of an advanced nursing practice model for PwD in the primary care setting in Germany.
Methods
InDePendent is a two-arm, multi-center, cluster-randomized controlled intervention study. Inclusion criteria are age ≥70 years, cognitively impaired (DemTect ≤8) or formally diagnosed with dementia, and living in the own home. Patients will be recruited by general practitioners or specialists. Randomization is carried out at the physicians’ level in a ratio of 1:2 (intervention vs. waiting-control group). After study inclusion, all participants will receive a baseline assessment and a follow-up assessment after 6 months. Patients of the intervention group will receive advanced dementia care management for 6 months, carried out by specialized nurses, who will conduct certain tasks, usually carried out by primary care physicians. This includes a standardized assessment of the patients’ unmet needs, the generation and implementation of an individualized care plan to address the patients’ needs in close coordination with the GP. PwD in the waiting-control group will receive routine care for 6 months and subsequently become part of the intervention group. The primary outcome is the number of unmet needs after 6 months measured by the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE). The primary analysis after 6 months is carried out using multilevel models and will be based on the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, caregiver burden, acceptance, and cost-effectiveness. In total, n=465 participants are needed to assess significant differences in the number of unmet needs between the intervention and control groups.
Discussion
The study will provide evidence about the acceptance, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of an innovative interprofessional concept based on advanced nursing care. Results will contribute to the implementation of such models in the German healthcare system. The goal is to improve the current treatment and care situation for PwD and their caregivers and to expand nursing roles.
Person-centered care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. An analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is one approach to quantify, weigh and rank patient preferences suitable for People living with Dementia (PlwD), due to simple pairwise comparisons of individual criteria from a complex decision problem. The objective of the present study was to design and pretest a dementia-friendly AHP survey. Methods: Two expert panels consisting of n = 4 Dementia Care Managers and n = 4 physicians to ensure content-validity, and “thinking-aloud” interviews with n = 11 PlwD and n = 3 family caregivers to ensure the face validity of the AHP survey. Following a semi-structured interview guide, PlwD were asked to assess appropriateness and comprehensibility. Data, field notes and partial interview transcripts were analyzed with a constant comparative approach, and feedback was incorporated continuously until PlwD had no further comments or struggles with survey completion. Consistency ratios (CRs) were calculated with Microsoft® Excel and ExpertChoice Comparion®. Results: Three main categories with sub-categories emerged: (1) Content: clear task introduction, (sub)criteria description, criteria homogeneity, (sub)criteria appropriateness, retest questions and sociodemography for heterogeneity; (2) Format: survey structure, pairwise comparison sequence, survey length, graphical design (incl. AHP scale), survey procedure explanation, survey assistance and response perspective; and (3) Layout: easy wording, short sentences and visual aids. Individual CRs ranged from 0.08 to 0.859, and the consolidated CR was 0.37 (0.038). Conclusions: Our formative qualitative study provides initial data for the design of a dementia-friendly AHP survey. Consideration of our findings may contribute to face and content validity in future quantitative preference research in dementia.
Background: Person-centered care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. This formative qualitative study aimed to identify (sub)criteria of PCC for the design of a quantitative, choice-based instrument to elicit patient preferences for person-centered dementia care. Method: Interviews were conducted with n = 2 dementia care managers, n = 10 People living with Dementia (PlwD), and n = 3 caregivers (CGs), which followed a semi-structured interview guide including a card game with PCC criteria identified from the literature. Criteria cards were shown to explore the PlwD’s conception. PlwD were asked to rank the cards to identify patient-relevant criteria of PCC. Audios were verbatim-transcribed and analyzed with qualitative content analysis. Card game results were coded on a 10-point-scale, and sums and means for criteria were calculated. Results: Six criteria with two sub-criteria emerged from the analysis; social relationships (indirect contact, direct contact), cognitive training (passive, active), organization of care (decentralized structures and no shared decision making, centralized structures and shared decision making), assistance with daily activities (professional, family member), characteristics of care professionals (empathy, education and work experience) and physical activities (alone, group). Dementia-sensitive wording and balance between comprehensibility vs. completeness of the (sub)criteria emerged as additional themes. Conclusions: Our formative study provides initial data about patient-relevant criteria of PCC to design a quantitative patient preference instrument. Future research may want to consider the balance between (sub)criteria comprehensibility vs. completeness.
Due to demographic changes, medical and nursing care in Germany faces new challenges. Combined with the aging of the population, an increase in age-associated diseases, including dementia, is to be expected. In addition to the increase in the number of persons with certain age-specific diseases, the aging of the German population also results in an increase in the number of persons with multiple diseases. The coexistence of dementia and comorbidity in people with dementia creates complex challenges for ambulatory and clinical care. The existence of comorbidity also leads to significantly higher medical costs.
Implementing new collaborative care programs and redistributing the responsibilities among outpatient care providers in the ambulatory care of patients may be one approach to ensure and improve the life and care situation of people with dementia. Collaborative Dementia Care Management, with the concept of support of general practitioners by specific qualified nurses demonstrated an adequate and effective approach for the compensation of supply deficits of PwD in the primary care sector. The aim of the dissertation is the health economic analysis of comorbidities in dementia and the evaluated Dementia Care Management of the DelpHi-MV study as an innovative approach for care and treatment of comorbidities in people with dementia. It is assumed that the cost of care for PwD varies depending on comorbidity and socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Therefore, the health care costs of people with dementia are calculated and the association between these care costs and comorbidity and socio-demographic and clinical factors of PwD was analyzed. In addition, we aimed to detect important subgroups (e.g. PwD with low, high or very high comorbidity) who benefit most from the DCM intervention and for whom a significant effect on costs, Quality-adjusted Life Years (QALY) and on the individual cost-effectiveness could be achieved, considering different sociodemographic and clinical characteristics like comorbidity.
In the sample of PwD comorbidity was highly prevalent. 47% of PwD had a very high, 37% a high and only 16% a low comorbidity in addition to dementia. The most prevalent co-existing comorbidity were diabetes mellitus (42%), peripheral vascular disease (28%) and cerebrovascular disease (25%). Total costs significantly increased by 528 € (SE=214, CI 95%=109-947, p=0.014) with each further comorbidity, especially due to significantly higher cost for medication and medical aids. Compared with a low comorbidity, a very high comorbidity was significantly associated with 818 € (SE=168, CI 95%= 489-1147, p<0.001) higher medication costs and 336 € (SE=161, CI 95%=20-652, p=0.037) higher cost for medical aids. There was no significant association between a higher comorbidity and cost for formal care services. The probability of DCM being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay of 40,000€/QALY was higher especially in PwD having a high comorbidity (96% vs. 26% for patients with a low comorbidity), in females (96% vs. 16% for males), in those living alone (96% vs. 26% for those living not alone) and in those being moderately to severely cognitively (100% vs. 3% for patients without cognitive impairment) and functionally impaired (97% vs. 16% for patients without functional impairment).
Comorbidity in PwD represents a substantial financial burden on healthcare payer’s and is a challenge for patients, healthcare providers and the health system. Innovative approaches are needed to achieve a patient-oriented management of treatment and care in comorbid PwD to reduce long-term costs. Collaborative dementia care management is one approach to solve these problems in dementia care. Thereby, patients characteristics significantly affect the cost-effectiveness of collaborative care. Female patients, patients living alone, and those with a high comorbidity as well as those being moderately cognitively and functionally impaired benefit most from DCM. For those subgroups of patients, healthcare payers could gain the highest cost savings and the highest effects on QALYs when the DCM approach will be implemented.
Abstract
Aims
To demonstrate the attitudes of general practitioners (GPs), nurses, persons with dementia, and caregiver towards suitable tasks and qualification needs for and the acceptance and impact of advanced nursing roles in German dementia primary care.
Design
Observational study using a questionnaire survey with 225 GPs, 232 nurses, 211 persons with dementia, and 197 caregivers, conducted between December 2017–August 2018.
Methods
A questionnaire was generated that includes specific assessment, prescription, and monitoring tasks of advanced nursing roles in dementia primary care as well as qualification requirements for and the acceptance and the impact of advanced nursing roles. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Group differences were assessed using the Fisher's exact test.
Results
Advanced nursing roles were highly appreciated across all groups. Assessment and monitoring tasks were rated as highly suitable, and prescription authorities as moderately suitable. Nurses felt less confident in assessment and monitoring, but more confident in prescribing as practitioners expected. Patients and caregivers would appreciate a takeover of tasks by nurses; nurses and practitioners preferred a delegation. A dementia‐specific qualification was rated as best suitable for advanced nursing roles, followed by ‘no specific qualification’ if medical tasks that only can be carried out by practitioners were delegated and an academic degree if tasks were substituted. Advanced nursing roles were rated as beneficial, strengthening the confidence in nursing care and improving the cooperation between professionals and the treatment. Practitioners assumed that advanced nursing roles would improve job satisfaction of nurses, which was not confirmed by nurses.
Conclusion
There is an extended consensus towards the enlargement of advanced nursing roles, represented by high endorsement, acceptance, and willingness to reorganize tasks.
Impact
Results debunk the common notion that German practitioners would be reluctant towards advanced nursing roles and a takeover of current practitioner tasks, supporting the implementation of advanced nursing roles in Germany.