MIND at Home-Streamlined: Study protocol for a randomized trial of home-based care coordination for persons with dementia and their caregivers

Comprehensive Dementia Care Models: State of the Science and Future Directions

The rising prevalence of Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's disease-related dementias has led to renewed public discourse and policy changes in response to the care needs of persons living with dementia and their care partners. Comprehensive dementia care models are central to many recent policy initiatives, most notably the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Guiding an Improved Dementia Experience model. Gerontological nursing research is uniquely positioned to design and lead research investigating the effectiveness of these initiatives, as well as the dissemination and scaling of existing comprehensive dementia care models. The current Annual State of the Science Review provides an overview of the current state of comprehensive dementia care models in the United States and relevant policies. Challenges and opportunities for nursing education, research, and implementation across the translational research continuum are also outlined. [Research in Gerontological Nursing, 18(1), 7-16.].

Pre-implementation planning for a new personalised, dementia post-diagnostic support intervention: exploring the perspective of professional stakeholders

BACKGROUND

Only a third of people with dementia receive a diagnosis and post-diagnostic support. An eight session, manualised, modular post-diagnostic support system (New Interventions for Independence in Dementia Study (NIDUS) - family), delivered remotely by non-clinical facilitators is the first scalable intervention to improve personalised goal attainment for people with dementia. It could significantly improve care quality.

AIMS

We aimed to explore system readiness for NIDUS-family, a scalable, personalised post-diagnostic support intervention.

METHOD

We conducted semi-structured interviews with professionals from dementia care services; the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided interviews and their thematic analysis.

RESULTS

From 2022 to 2023, we interviewed a purposive sample of 21 professionals from seven English National Health Service, health and social care services. We identified three themes: (1) potential value of a personalised intervention - interviewees perceived the capacity for choice and supporting person-centred care as relative advantages over existing resources; (2) compatibility and deliverability with existing systems - the NIDUS-family intervention model was perceived as compatible with service goals and clients' needs, but current service infrastructures, financing and commissioning briefs constraining resources to those at greatest need were seen as barriers to providing universal, post-diagnostic care; (3) fit with current workforce skills - the intervention model aligned well with staff development plans; delivery by non-clinically qualified staff was considered an advantage over current care options.

CONCLUSIONS

Translating evidence for scalable and effective post-diagnostic care into practice will support national policies to widen access to support and upskill support workers, but requires a greater focus on prevention in commissioning briefs and resource planning.

Interprofessional collaboration in palliative dementia care

Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is essential for high-quality palliative care (PC) for persons with dementia. The aim of this scoping review was to identify IPC approaches in palliative dementia care and explore the elements constituting these approaches. We performed a search in PubMed, CINAHL, and PsychINFO using the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' manual and PRISMA guidelines, and conducted content analysis of the included articles. In total, 28 articles were included, which described 16 IPC approaches in palliative dementia care. The content analysis revealed three overall elements of these approaches: 1) collaborative themes, 2) collaborative processes, and 3) resources facilitating collaboration. Frequently reported collaborative themes embraced pain management and providing care in the dying phase. These themes were addressed through intertwined collaborative processes including communication, coordination, assessing and monitoring, and reflecting and evaluating. To ensure optimal IPC in palliative dementia care, various resources were required, such as PC knowledge, skills to manage symptoms, skills to communicate with collaborators, and a facilitating environment. In conclusion, the identified IPC approaches in palliative dementia care involve diverse collaborating professionals who mainly manage symptoms, prepare for the dying phase and require material and immaterial resources to enable optimal IPC in palliative dementia care.

CommunityRx, a social care assistance intervention for family and friend caregivers delivered at the point of care: two concurrent blinded randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

CommunityRx is an evidence-based social care intervention delivered to family and friend caregivers ("caregivers") at the point of healthcare to address health-related social risks (HRSRs). Two CommunityRx randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are being fielded concurrently on Chicago's South Side, a predominantly African American/Black community. CommunityRx-Hunger is a double-blind RCT enrolling caregivers of hospitalized children. CommunityRx-Dementia is a single-blind RCT enrolling caregivers of community-residing people with dementia. RCTs with caregivers face recruitment barriers, including caregiver burden and lack of systematic strategies to identify caregivers in clinical settings. COVID-19 pandemic-related visitor restrictions exacerbated these barriers and prompted the need for iteration of the protocols from in-person to remote operations. This study describes these protocols and methods used for successful iteration to overcome barriers.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

CommunityRx uses individual-level data to generate personalized, local community resource referrals for basic, health and caregiving needs. In early 2020, two in-person RCT protocols were pre-tested. In March 2020, when pandemic conditions prohibited face-to-face clinical enrollment, both protocols were iterated to efficient, caregiver-centered remote operations. Iterations were enabled in part by the Automated Randomized Controlled Trial Information-Communication System (ARCTICS), a trial management system innovation engineered to integrate the data collection database (REDCap) with community resource referral (NowPow) and SMS texting (Mosio) platforms. Enabled by engaged Community Advisory Boards and ARCTICS, both RCTs quickly adapted to remote operations. To accommodate these adaptations, launch was delayed until November (CommunityRx-Hunger) and December (CommunityRx-Dementia) 2020. Despite the delay, 65% of all planned participants (CommunityRx-Hunger n = 417/640; CommunityRx-Dementia n = 222/344) were enrolled by December 2021, halfway through our projected enrollment timeline. Both trials enrolled 13% more participants in the first 12 months than originally projected for in-person enrollment.

DISCUSSION

Our asset-based, community-engaged approach combined with widely accessible institutional and commercial information technologies facilitated rapid migration of in-person trials to remote operations. Remote or hybrid RCT designs for social care interventions may be a viable, scalable alternative to in-person recruitment and intervention delivery protocols, particularly for caregivers and other groups that are under-represented in traditional health services research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: CommunityRx-Hunger (NCT04171999, 11/21/2019); CommunityRx for Caregivers (NCT04146545, 10/31/2019).

Ethical Aspects of Physician Decision-Making for Deprescribing Among Older Adults With Dementia

Importance

Physicians endorse deprescribing of risky or unnecessary medications for older adults (aged ≥65 years) with dementia, but there is a lack of information on what influences decisions to deprescribe in this population.

Objective

To understand how physicians make decisions to deprescribe for older adults with moderate dementia and ethical and pragmatic concerns influencing those decisions.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A cross-sectional national mailed survey study of a random sample of 3000 primary care physicians from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile who care for older adults was conducted from January 15 to December 31, 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The study randomized participants to consider 2 clinical scenarios in which a physician may decide to deprescribe a medication for older adults with moderate dementia: 1 in which the medication could cause an adverse drug event if continued and the other in which there is no evidence of benefit. Participants ranked 9 factors related to possible ethical and pragmatic concerns through best-worst scaling methods (from greatest barrier to smallest barrier to deprescribing). Conditional logit regression quantified the relative importance for each factor as a barrier to deprescribing.

Results

A total of 890 physicians (35.0%) returned surveys; 511 (57.4%) were male, and the mean (SD) years since graduation was 26.0 (11.7). Most physicians had a primary specialty in family practice (50.4% [449 of 890]) and internal medicine (43.5% [387 of 890]). A total of 689 surveys were sufficiently complete to analyze. In both clinical scenarios, the 2 greatest barriers to deprescribing were (1) the patient or family reporting symptomatic benefit from the medication (beneficence and autonomy) and (2) the medication having been prescribed by another physician (autonomy and nonmaleficence). The least influential factor was ease of paying for the medication (justice).

Conclusions and Relevance

Findings from this national survey study of primary care physicians suggests that understanding ethical aspects of physician decision-making can inform clinician education about medication management and deprescribing decisions for older adults with moderate dementia.

"At least we finally found out what it was": Dementia diagnosis in minoritized populations

BACKGROUND

Disparities in diagnosis persist among persons living with dementia (PLWD); most research on delayed diagnosis relies on medical records or administrative claims. This study aimed to identify factors that delay or facilitate dementia diagnoses in racial or ethnic minoritized PLWD and elicit care partner perspectives on timing and effects of diagnosis.

METHODS

Maryland-based participants cared for a PLWD age 60 or older, self-identified as Black/African/African-American, Asian, or Hispanic/Latino, and spoke English. Nineteen care partner in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted and analyzed using conventional qualitative content analysis methods.

RESULTS

Biological, sociocultural, and environmental factors delayed dementia diagnosis. Memory loss was the most common early symptom, but the onset was often subtle or perceived as normal aging. Stigma and secrecy surrounding dementia influenced recognition and discussion of dementia among families and communities. Diagnoses were family-initiated and started in primary care. Care partners were divided in their perceptions of diagnosis timeliness and whether earlier diagnosis would have changed outcomes. Family reactions to dementia diagnoses varied; most participants expressed a strong sentiment of service and duty to care for older family members. Participants overwhelmingly felt the benefits of obtaining a dementia diagnosis outweighed harms.

CONCLUSIONS

Numerous factors affect dementia diagnosis in racial and ethnic minoritized PLWD. Normalization of brain health discussions and systematic, proactive discussion and detection of dementia in primary care may address multilevel barriers and facilitators to diagnosis. Systems-level and community-led public health interventions may also help address disparities in brain health education and dementia diagnosis.

Two concurrent randomized controlled trials of CommunityRx, a social care intervention for family and friend caregivers delivered at the point of care

Background

CommunityRx is an evidence-based social care intervention delivered to family and friend caregivers ("caregivers") at the point of healthcare to address health-related social risks (HRSRs). CommunityRx-Hunger is a double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) that enrolls caregivers of hospitalized children. CommunityRx-Dementia is a single-blind RCT that enrolls caregivers of community-residing people with dementia. Clinical trials that enroll caregivers face recruitment barriers, including caregiver burden and lack of systematic strategies to identify and track caregivers. COVID-19 pandemic-related visitor restrictions exacerbated these barriers and prompted the need for iteration of the CommunityRx protocols from in-person to remote operations. This study describes the novel methods used to iterate existing RCT protocols and factors contributing to their successful iteration.

Methods

CommunityRx uses individual-level data to generate personalized community resource referrals for basic, health and caregiving needs. Our research program uses an asset-based, community-engaged approach including study-specific community advisory boards (CABs). In early 2020, both RCT protocols were pre-tested in-person. In March 2020, when pandemic conditions prohibited enrollment during clinical encounters, both protocols were iterated to efficient, caregiver-centered remote operations. Iterations were enabled in part by the Automated Randomized Controlled Trial Information-Communication System (ARCTICS), a trial management system innovation engineered to integrate the data collection database (REDCap) with community resource referral (NowPow) and SMS texting (Mosio) platforms.

Results

Enabled by engaged CABs and ARCTICS, both RCTs quickly adapted to remote operations. Designed before the pandemic, we had planned to launch both trials by March 2020 and complete enrollment by December 2021. The pandemic postponed launch until November (CommunityRx-Hunger) and December (CommunityRx-Dementia) 2020. Despite the delay, 65% of all planned participants (CommunityRx-Hunger n = 417/640; CommunityRx-Dementia n = 222/344) were enrolled by December 2021, halfway through our projected enrollment timeline. Both trials enrolled 13% more participants in 12 months than originally projected in-person.

Conclusions

Our asset-based, community-engaged approach combined with widely accessible institutional and commercial information technologies facilitated rapid migration to remote trial operations. Remote or hybrid RCT designs for social care interventions may be a viable, scalable alternative to in-person recruitment and intervention delivery protocols, particularly for caregivers and other groups that are under-represented in traditional health services research.

Trial Status

Both studies are registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: CommunityRx-Hunger (NCT04171999); CommunityRx for Caregivers (NCT04146545); My Diabetes My Community (NCT04970810).

Patient navigation programs for people with dementia, their caregivers, and members of the care team: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this review was to map the literature on the characteristics of patient navigation programs for people with dementia, their caregivers, and members of the care team across all settings. The secondary objective was to map the literature on the barriers and facilitators for implementing and delivering such patient navigation programs.

INTRODUCTION

People with dementia have individualized needs that change according to the stage of their condition. They often face fragmented and uncoordinated care when seeking support to address these needs. Patient navigation may be one way to help people with dementia access better care. Patient navigation is a model of care that aims to guide people through the health care system, matching their unmet needs to appropriate resources, services, and programs. Organizing the available information on this topic will present a clearer picture of how patient navigation programs work.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This review focused on the characteristics of patient navigation programs for people living with dementia, their caregivers, and the members of the care team. It excluded programs not explicitly focused on dementia. It included patient navigation across all settings, delivered in all formats, and administered by all types of navigators if the programs aligned with this review's definition of patient navigation. This review excluded case management programs.

METHODS

This review was conducted in accordance with JBI methodology for scoping reviews. MEDLINE, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, Embase, and ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health databases were searched for published full-text articles. A gray literature search was also conducted. Two independent reviewers screened articles for relevance against the inclusion criteria. The results are presented in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram, and the extracted data are presented narratively and in tabular format.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine articles describing 20 programs were included in this review. The majority of these articles were published between 2015 and 2020, and based out of the United States. The types of sources included randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and qualitative exploratory studies, among others. All programs provided some form of referral or linkage to other services or resources. Most dementia navigation programs included an interdisciplinary team, and most programs were community-based. There was no consistent patient navigator title or standard delivery method. Commonly reported barriers to implementing and delivering these programs were navigator burnout and a lack of coordination between stakeholders. Commonly reported facilitators were collaboration, communication, and formal partnerships between key stakeholders, as well as accessible and flexible program delivery models.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates variety and flexibility in the types of services patient navigation programs provided, as well as in the modes of service delivery and in navigator title. This information may be useful for individuals and organizations looking to implement their own programs in the future. It also provides a framework for future systematic reviews that seek to evaluate the effectiveness or efficacy of dementia navigation programs.

The associations between unmet needs with protective factors, risk factors and outcomes among care partners of community-dwelling persons living with dementia

OBJECTIVES

Describe the prevalence and types of unmet needs among community-dwelling dementia care partners (CPs) and determine associations between unmet needs with protective factors, risk factors and outcomes.

METHOD

A cross-sectional analysis of 638 racially and cognitively diverse community-dwelling persons living with dementia (PLWD) and their CPs participating in a comprehensive in-home assessment of dementia-related needs. Unmet CP needs (19 items, 6 domains) were rated by a clinician using the Johns Hopkins Dementia Care Needs Assessment (JHDCNA). Multivariate linear regression models were used to examine associations between total percent unmet CP needs with demographic, protective and risk factors.

RESULTS

Nearly all CPs had at least one unmet need (99.53%), with a mean of 5.7 (±2.6). The most common domains with ≥1 unmet need were memory disorder education, care skills and knowledge of resources (98%), legal issues/concerns (73.8%), CP mental health (44.6%) and access to informal support (42.7%). Adjusted multivariate models suggest the strongest consistent predictive factors relate to informal emotional support, CP physical health, use or difficulty getting formal services/supports (both for CPs and PLWD), and CP time spent with PLWD. Greater levels of unmet needs were associated with worse PLWD outcomes and CP outcomes, after adjusting for demographics.

CONCLUSIONS

CPs have high rates of diverse, but modifiable unmet needs. Data suggest optimal approaches to dementia care should take a family-centered home-based approach that includes routine CP needs assessment, offer targeted interventions that include both traditional medical supports as well as strategies to increase and leverage informal social networks, and ones that can bridge and coordinate medical with non-medical supports. These findings can be used to inform new approaches to support CPs, improve PLWD and CP outcomes, and target groups most at risk for inequities.

Reasons for Hospitalization while Receiving Dementia Care Coordination through Maximizing Independence at Home

OBJECTIVES

Persons living with dementia (PLWD), particularly those with higher levels of functional impairment, are at increased risk of hospitalization and higher hospital-associated health care costs. Our objective was to provide a nuanced description of reasons for hospitalizations over a 12-month period among community-living persons with dementia taking part in a dementia care coordination study using caregiver-reported data and to describe how reasons varied by disease stage.

DESIGN

Retrospective descriptive analysis of pooled data from 2 concurrent studies of PLWD receiving the MIND at Home dementia care coordination program.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Four hundred ninety-four community-dwelling PLWD with a family caregiver in the Greater Baltimore and Central Maryland region, 2015‒2019.

METHODS

PLWD sociodemographic, clinical, functional, cognitive, and behavioral characteristics were assessed during an in-home baseline visit. Caregiver-reported hospitalizations and primary reasons for events were recorded every 4.5 months by research staff and by memory care coordinators during program delivery for a 12-month period. Hospitalization event data were subsequently reviewed, reconciled, and coded by a trained investigator.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy PLWD (34.4%) had at least 1 hospitalization within 12 months of enrollment, with 316 separate events. The most common primary reason for hospitalization according to caregivers was infection (22.4%), falls (16.5%), and cardiovascular/pulmonary (12.4%). Top reasons for hospitalization were falls among persons with mild and moderate functional impairment (17.7% and 21.9% respectively) and infection among PLWD with severe impairment (30.3%).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Infections and falls were the most common caregiver-reported reasons for hospitalization in PLWD receiving dementia care coordination. Reasons for hospitalization varied based on severity of functional impairment. Greater understanding of reasons for hospitalization among PLWD receiving dementia care management interventions, from multiple important perspectives, may help programs more effectively address and prevent hospitalization.

Case management for people with dementia living at home and their informal caregivers: A scoping review

Case management is a complex intervention aimed at addressing a variety of health needs of people in their social environment. Case management for people with dementia is often poorly defined and insufficiently described. The crucial process steps are often not well understood. We aim to map and compare the key components, processes and contextual factors of case management programmes for dementia and to explore aspects of the interventions' generalisability. Our search covered the databases PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane and GeroLit, as well as policy papers from international organisations. We included qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies in the English or German language that was published between 1999 and 2020. The programmes were analysed according to programme characteristics, case management intervention and the structural and processing conditions. We identified 67 studies dealing with 25 programmes. Approximately half of the programmes were investigated in randomised controlled trials, two programmes used a mixed-methods design and the remaining were the subject of pre-post cohort studies. Participants in the studies were predominantly dyads of people with dementia and their informal caregivers. About half of the programmes reported a theoretical framework. All the programmes were derived from case management approaches or referred to such approaches. Despite huge differences in implementation, all the programmes covered the case management steps. In 14 out of 25 programmes, case management was carried out without additional intervention, the other programmes provided mainly education and training for informal caregivers. Costs of the case management interventions were stated in more than half of the programmes.The effectiveness and generalisability of dementia-specific case management interventions could be enhanced if the framework introduced in the review was used in the future by policy, practice and research.

Transcending inequities in dementia care in Black communities: Lessons from the maximizing independence at home care coordination program

Purpose

We examine care partners’ experience of the Maximizing Independence at Home (MIND) intervention, a multicomponent, home-based dementia care coordination program designed to provide high quality, wholistic care coordination for people and families living with dementia. The goal of the study was to understand 1. the unique dementia-related needs of Black care partners and barriers and challenges to caregiving experienced within the Black community, 2. perceived benefits of the MIND program, and 3. ways to improve the program and make it more culturally responsive to the Black community.

Method

We conducted three focus groups totaling 20 care partners of people living with dementia; who participated in the MIND intervention (2014–2019); all Black/African American and English speaking. Verbatim transcriptions were independently analyzed line-by-line by two coders using inductive approaches.

Findings

Participants noted three overarching themes related to dementia care needs and challenges in the Black community: difficulty finding and accessing dementia information and relevant services and supports; familial conflict/lack of sibling and familial support; and lack of effective communication about dementia within Black Communities. Regarding MIND at home program benefits, four themes emerged: 1. perceived to help locate resources (formal and informal); 2. provided care partners an opportunity for socialization and interaction; 3. included comprehensive assessments and helpful linked information; and 4. resulted in a “much needed break for care partners.” Increased diversity of the MIND program personnel, greater clarity and consistency in MIND program promotion, and better communications were themes for how the program could be improved.

Conclusion

Care partners participating in the MIND program perceived common benefits in aspects related to care for the persons living with dementia as well as benefits to themselves, believed the program addressed important challenges and gaps in education, services, and social support, and could be enhanced in its delivery and cultural responsiveness.

Recruitment of a diverse research cohort in a large metropolitan area for dementia intervention studies

The human and financial costs of dementia care are growing exponentially. Over five and a half million older Americans are estimated to be living with Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD). By 2050, this is expected to increase to over 13 million, and persons of color are at the highest risk. Considerable funds have been committed to research to prevent, treat, and care for persons at risk for ADRD. However, enrollment of research participants, particularly those coming from diverse backgrounds, is a perennial challenge and has serious implications. This paper quantitatively details the results of a community-based multi-modal outreach effort to recruit a racially diverse sample for non-pharmacological dementia intervention, including referral and participant sources and yield, total recruitment costs and cost per enrolled dyad, and a qualitative description of lessons learned, with particular attention to the recruitment of Black participants. The largest number of referrals and referrals converting to study participants, for both Black and White persons, were from a Maryland Department of Health mailing to Medicaid recipients. There was an important difference in the most effective strategies, proportionally, for white and Black participants. The MDH mailing had the highest yield for our Black referrals and participants, while professional referrals had the highest yield for white referrals and participants. The total estimated cost of recruitment was $101,058, or $156.19 per enrolled dyad. Ultimately 646 persons with dementia and care partner dyads were enrolled, 323 (50%) of whom were Black.

Chronic Care, Dementia Care Management, and Financial Considerations

The needs of persons living with Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's disease-related dementia (AD/ADRD) are challenged by tremendous complexity impacting both care delivery and financing. Most persons living with dementia (PLWD) also suffer from other chronic medical or mental health conditions, which further burden quality of life and function. In addition to difficult treatment choices, optimal dementia care models likely involve people and services that are not typical pieces of the health care delivery system but are all critical partners-care partners, social workers, and community services, to name a few. More than 200 models of dementia care have demonstrated some efficacy. However, these successful interventions that might address much of the care needed by PLWD are uninsured in the United States, where insurance coverage has focused on acute care needs. This poses great difficulties for both care provision and care financing. In this article, we review these 3 key challenges: dementia care for those with chronic comorbid disease; care models that require people who are not typical providers in traditional care delivery systems; and the mandate to provide high-quality care that is currently not funded by usual health care insurance. We propose promising next steps that could substantially improve the lives of PLWD and the lives of their care partners, and highlight some of the many research questions that remain.

Free-Text Documentation of Dementia Symptoms in Home Healthcare: A Natural Language Processing Study

Background

Little is known about symptom documentation related to Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) by home healthcare (HHC) clinicians.

Objective

This study: (1) developed a natural language processing (NLP) algorithm that identifies common neuropsychiatric symptoms of ADRD in HHC free-text clinical notes; (2) described symptom clusters and hospitalization or emergency department (ED) visit rates for patients with and without these symptoms.

Method

We examined a corpus of -2.6 million free-text notes for 112,237 HHC episodes among 89,459 patients admitted to a non-profit HHC agency for post-acute care with any diagnosis. We used NLP software (NimbleMiner) to construct indicators of six neuropsychiatric symptoms. Structured HHC assessment data were used to identify known ADRD diagnoses and construct measures of hospitalization/ED use during HHC.

Results

Neuropsychiatric symptoms were documented for 40% of episodes. Common clusters included impaired memory, anxiety and/or depressed mood. One in three episodes without an ADRD diagnosis had documented symptoms. Hospitalization/ED rates increased with one or more symptoms present.

Conclusion

HHC providers should examine episodes with neuropsychiatric symptoms but no ADRD diagnoses to determine whether ADRD diagnosis was missed or to recommend ADRD evaluation. NLP-generated symptom indicators can help to identify high-risk patients for targeted interventions.

LIVE@Home.Path-innovating the clinical pathway for home-dwelling people with dementia and their caregivers: study protocol for a mixed-method, stepped-wedge, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The global health challenge of dementia is exceptional in size, cost and impact. It is the only top ten cause of death that cannot be prevented, cured or substantially slowed, leaving disease management, caregiver support and service innovation as the main targets for reduction of disease burden. Institutionalization of persons with dementia is common in western countries, despite patients preferring to live longer at home, supported by caregivers. Such complex health challenges warrant multicomponent interventions thoroughly implemented in daily clinical practice. This article describes the rationale, development, feasibility testing and implementation process of the LIVE@Home.Path trial.

METHODS

The LIVE@Home.Path trial is a 2-year, multicenter, mixed-method, stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial, aiming to include 315 dyads of home-dwelling people with dementia and their caregivers, recruited from 3 municipalities in Norway. The stepped-wedge randomization implies that all dyads receive the intervention, but the timing is determined by randomization. The control group constitutes the dyads waiting for the intervention. The multicomponent intervention was developed in collaboration with user-representatives, researchers and stakeholders to meet the requirements from the national Dementia Plan 2020. During the 6-month intervention period, the participants will be allocated to a municipal coordinator, the core feature of the intervention, responsible for regular contact with the dyads to facilitate L: Learning, I: Innovation, V: Volunteering and E: Empowerment (LIVE). The primary outcome is resource utilization. This is measured by the Resource Utilization in Dementia (RUD) instrument and the Relative Stress Scale (RSS), reflecting that resource utilization is more than the actual time required for caring but also how burdensome the task is experienced by the caregiver.

DISCUSSION

We expect the implementation of LIVE to lead to a pathway for dementia treatment and care which is cost-effective, compared to treatment as usual, and will support high-quality independent living, at home.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04043364. Registered on 15 March 2019.

Cost-Effective Care Coordination for People With Dementia at Home

Background and Objectives

People with dementia (PWD) represent some of the highest-need and highest-cost individuals living in the community. Maximizing Independence (MIND) at Home is a potentially cost-effective and scalable home-based dementia care coordination program that uses trained, nonclinical community workers as the primary contact between the PWD and their care partner, supported by a multidisciplinary clinical team with expertise in dementia care.

Research Design and Methods

Cost of care management services based on actual time spent by care management personnel over first 12 months of MIND at Home intervention was calculated for 342 MIND at Home recipients from Baltimore, Maryland and surrounding areas participating in a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) funded Health Care Innovation Award demonstration project. Difference-in-differences analysis of claims-based Medicaid spending of 120 dually-eligible MIND at Home participants with their propensity score matched comparison group (n = 360).

Results

The average cost per enrollee per month was $110, or $1,320 per annum. Medicaid expenditures of dually-eligible participants grew 1.12 percentage points per quarter more slowly than that of the matched comparison group. Most savings came from slower growth in inpatient and long-term nursing home use. Net of the cost of the 5-year MIND at Home intervention, 5-year Medicaid savings are estimated at $7,052 per beneficiary, a 1.12-fold return on investment.

Discussion and Implications

Managed care plans with the flexibility to engage community health workers could benefit from a low-cost, high-touch intervention to meet the needs of enrollees with dementia. Limitations for using and reimbursing community health workers exist in Medicare fee-for-service, which CMS should address to maximize benefit for PWD.

Unmet needs in community-living persons with dementia are common, often non-medical and related to patient and caregiver characteristics

OBJECTIVE

Understanding which characteristics of persons with dementia (PWD) and their caregivers are associated with unmet needs can inform strategies to address those needs. Our purpose was to determine the percentage of PWD having unmet needs and significant correlates of unmet needs in PWD.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional data were analyzed using bivariate and hierarchical multiple linear regression analyses.

SETTING

Participants lived in the greater Baltimore, Maryland and Washington DC suburban area.

PARTICIPANTS

A sample of 646 community-living PWD and their informal caregivers participated in an in-home assessment of dementia-related needs.

MEASUREMENTS

Unmet needs were identified using the Johns Hopkins Dementia Care Needs Assessment. Correlates of unmet needs were determined using demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, functional and quality of life characteristics of the PWD and their caregivers.

RESULTS

PWD had a mean of 10.6 (±4.8) unmet needs out of 43 items (24.8%). Unmet needs were most common in Home/Personal Safety (97.4%), General Health Care (83.1%), and Daily Activities (73.2%) domains. Higher unmet needs were significantly related to non-white race, lower education, higher cognitive function, more neuropsychiatric symptoms, lower quality of life in PWD, and having caregivers with lower education or who spent fewer hours/week with the PWD.

CONCLUSIONS

Unmet needs are common in community-living PWD, and most are non-medical. Home-based dementia care can identify and address PWD's unmet needs by focusing on care recipients and caregivers to enable PWD to remain safely at home.