A systematic review of specialist inpatient dementia care services versus standard inpatient dementia care in acute hospitals

The impact of a hospital-based special care unit on behavioural and psychological symptoms in older people living with dementia

BACKGROUND

Hospital patients with behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) are vulnerable to a range of adverse outcomes. Hospital-based Special Care Units (SCUs) are secure dementia-enabling environments providing specialised gerontological care. Due to a scarcity of research, their value remains unconfirmed.

OBJECTIVE

To compare hospital based SCU management of BPSD with standard care.

DESIGN

Single-case multiple baseline design.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

One-hundred admissions to an 8-bed SCU over 2 years in a large Australian public hospital.

METHODS

Repeated measures of BPSD severity were undertaken prospectively by specialist dementia nurses for patients admitted to a general ward (standard care) and transferred to the SCU. Demographic and other clinical data, including diagnoses, medication use, and care-related outcomes were obtained from medical records retrospectively. Analysis used multilevel models to regress BPSD scores onto care-setting outcomes, adjusting for time and other factors.

RESULTS

When receiving standard care, patients' BPSD severity was 6.8 (95% CI 6.04-7.64) points higher for aggression, 15.6 (95% CI 13.90-17.42) points higher for the neuropsychiatric inventory, and 5.8 (95% CI 5.14-6.50) points higher for non-aggressive agitation compared to SCU. Patients receiving standard care also experienced increased odds for patient-to-nurse violence (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.67-4.09), security callouts (OR 5.39 95% CI 3.40-8.52), physical restraint (OR 17.20, 95% CI 7.94-37.25) and antipsychotic administration (OR 3.41, 95% CI 1.60-7.24).

CONCLUSION

Clinically significant reductions in BPSD and psychotropic administration were associated with SCU care relative to standard ward care. These results suggest more robust investigation of hospital SCUs, and dementia-enabling design are warranted.

Facilitators and barriers to implementing a specialized care unit for persons with cognitive impairment in an acute geriatric hospital: a process evaluation

BACKGROUND

Implementing dementia care interventions in an acute hospital poses multiple challenges. To understand factors influencing the implementation, in-depth knowledge about specific facilitators and barriers is necessary. The aim of this study was to identify facilitators and barriers to implementing an interprofessional, multicomponent intervention of a specialized unit for persons with cognitive impairment in an acute geriatric hospital.

METHODS

We conducted a process evaluation as part of a participatory action research study. For data collection, semi-structured individual interviews with fifteen professionals involved in the implementation of the specialized unit. We further conducted two focus groups with twelve professionals working on other units of the geriatric hospital. We performed a qualitative content analysis following Kuckartz's content-structuring analysis scheme.

RESULTS

We identified the following barriers to implementing the specialized unit: uncontrollable contextual changes (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic), staff turnover in key functions, high fluctuation in the nursing team, traditional work culture, entrenched structures, inflexible and efficiency-oriented processes, monoprofessional attitude, neglect of project-related communication, and fragmentation of interprofessional cooperation. An established culture of interprofessionalism, an interprofessionally composed project group, cooperation with a research partner, as well as the project groups' motivation and competence of managing change facilitated the implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation faced numerous barriers that can be described using the key constructs of the i-PARIHS framework: context, recipients, innovation, and facilitation. Overcoming these barriers requires an organizational development approach, extended project duration and increased process orientation. Furthermore, strategically planned, precise and ongoing communication towards all persons involved seems crucial. Differences between the work cultures of the professions involved deserve particular attention with regard to project-related roles and processes.

Introducing the '3 Fs model of complexity' for people with dementia accessing a NHS mental health inpatient dementia assessment ward: An interpretive description study

BACKGROUND

In the United Kingdom, the use of the terms 'complex' and 'complexity' alongside dementia is reflected in a number of policy and practice documents. However, there is a lack of evidence that explores how complexity is perceived, constructed and experienced by people with dementia, family carers and practitioners working in the NHS dementia inpatient assessment wards [dementia assessment wards].

OBJECTIVE

To explore the meaning and concept of complexity in dementia from within the setting of a dementia assessment ward and develop a practice model.

METHODS

The study was conducted over three phases: 1) an online electronic survey of UK national dementia leaders; 2) individual interviews and a focus group with dementia practitioners in two dementia assessment wards; 3) case studies of four patients with dementia resident on a dementia assessment ward which included their identified family carer/consultee, the named clinician on the ward involved in that person's care and a care records review.

RESULTS

The findings highlighted that complexity is constructed through a number of interconnected and interrelated domains that vary in acuity. These findings have been developed into the '3 Fs Model of Complexity' and the 3'Fs' stand for Fixed, Flexible and Fluctuating. The Fixed domain consists of six components which are always present in complexity. The Flexible domain consists of 14 components and a person with dementia may experience any number of Flexible domain components at any one time. The Fluctuating domain highlights that all components have the ability to vary in their acuity.

CONCLUSION

The '3 Fs Model of Complexity' may facilitate a more holistic view of a person with dementia than when 'symptoms' are viewed in isolation. Going forward, and subject to further refinement and testing, the '3 Fs Model of Complexity' could help guide the selection of tailored, personalised interventions for people with dementia, including formulation approaches.

The Characteristics and Outcomes of People with Dementia in Inpatient Mental Health Care: A Review

OBJECTIVES

Inpatient mental health beds for people with dementia are a limited resource. Practitioners need an understanding of this population to provide high-quality care and design services. This review examines the characteristics, care, and outcomes of people with dementia admitted to inpatient mental health services.

METHODS

Systematic searches of key databases were undertaken up to November 2021. Findings were grouped into categories and then synthesized into a narrative review.

RESULTS

The review identified 36 international papers, the majority of which were retrospective audits. The literature describes significant psychiatric and medical comorbidity and significant risk of change in residence and death associated with admission.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a limited literature describing the characteristics, care, and outcomes of people with dementia in inpatient mental health services. The lack of research is striking given the complexity and vulnerability of this client group. More research is needed to describe the needs of this group, current and best practice to optimize care.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Professionals working in inpatient mental health services need to be aware of the evidence base available, consider how they evaluate patient outcomes, review their staffing and skills mix, and seek the views of patients and relatives in improving services.

Outcomes of a financial incentive scheme for dementia care by dementia specialist teams in acute-care hospitals: A difference-in-differences analysis of a nationwide retrospective cohort study in Japan

OBJECTIVES

The quality of care for dementia in acute-care settings has been criticised. In 2016, the Japanese universal health insurance system introduced a financial incentive scheme for dementia care by dementia specialist teams in acute-care hospitals. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of this financial incentive scheme on short-term outcomes (in-hospital mortality and 30-day readmission).

DESIGN AND METHODS

Using a Japanese nationwide inpatient database, we identified older adult patients with moderate-to-severe dementia admitted for pneumonia, heart failure, cerebral infarction, urinary tract infection, intracranial injury or hip fracture from April 2014 to March 2018. We selected 180 propensity score-matched pairs of hospitals that adopted (n = 180 of 185) and that did not adopt (n = 180 of 744) the financial incentive scheme. We then conducted a patient-level difference-in-differences analysis. In a sensitivity analysis, we restricted the postintervention group to patients who actually received dementia care.

RESULTS

There was no association between a hospital's adoption of the incentive scheme and in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88-1.06; p = 0.48) or 30-day readmission (aOR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.95-1.14; p = 0.37). Only 29% of patients in hospitals adopting the scheme actually received dementia care. The sensitivity analysis showed that receiving dementia care was associated with decreased in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The financial incentive scheme to enhance dementia care by dementia specialist teams in Japan may not be working effectively, but the results do suggest that individual dementia care was associated with decreased in-hospital mortality.

A systematic review of interventions to improve acute hospital care for people with dementia

The aim of this study was to provide an overview of interventions targeting hospital care of patients with dementia. We conducted a systematic review, including interventional study designs. We searched five electronic databases, conducted a hand search and performed citation tracking. To assess risk of bias, we used Cochrane Collaboration's tool, ROBANS and AMSTAR. We narratively summarized the outcomes. The findings of twenty studies indicated a broad range of interventions and outcomes. We categorised the interventions into eight intervention types. Educational programmes were the most reported intervention type and resulted in improved staff outcomes. Family-/person-centred care programmes, use of specially trained nurses and delirium management programmes were effective in improving some patient-related outcomes. However, current evidence is insufficient to declare which interventions are effective in improving dementia care in acute hospitals. Future research should focus on relevant patient and family caregiver outcomes and must consider the complexity of the interventions when evaluating them.