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.

Perceived oral health and oral health behaviours among home-dwelling older people with and without domiciliary care

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to compare the perceived oral health and oral health behaviours of home-dwelling older people with and without domiciliary care.

BACKGROUND

Oral health is poor in long-term care, but less is known about perceived oral health of home-dwelling older people receiving domiciliary care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from the Health 2000 and Health 2011 surveys (BRIF8901) were used. Interview participants were at least 70 years old and living at home with or without domiciliary care (n = 1298 in 2000 and n = 1027 in 2011). Differences in perceived oral health (subjective oral health, pain, eating difficulties) and oral health behaviours (hygiene, use of services) were compared based on the use of domiciliary care and stratified by gender. Differences between groups were compared with the chi-square test.

RESULTS

In 2011, compared to non-clients, domiciliary care clients more often had poor subjective oral health (40.3% vs. 28.9%, P = .045). In both surveys, they also used oral health services less recently (2000, 76.4% vs. 60.9%; and 2011, 61.1% vs. 46.6%) and more often had difficulties chewing hard food (2000, 50.6% vs. 34%, P < .001; and 2011, 38.4% vs. 20.7%, P < .001) than non-clients. In 2000, clients had more difficulty eating dry food without drinking (39.5% vs. 21.6%, P < .001) and cleaning their teeth and mouth (14.3% vs. 1.1%, P < .001) than non-clients. Women clients in 2011 brushed their teeth less often than non-clients (43.5% vs. 23.7%, respectively, P = .001).

CONCLUSION

Domiciliary care clients have poorer perceived oral health, and greater difficulties with eating and oral hygiene maintenance than non-clients.

Interventions to enhance access to and utilization of formal community care services for home dwelling persons with dementia and their informal carers. A scoping review

Objectives: Home dwelling people with dementia and their informal carers often do not receive the formal care services they need. This study examined and mapped the research regarding interventions to improve access and use of formal community care services.Method: This is a scoping review with searches in PubMed, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Social Science Citation index and searches of grey literature in international and national databases. Studies were categorized according to the measure used to enhance access or use.Results: From international databases, 2833 studies were retrieved, 11 were included. Five studies were included from other sources. In total, 16 studies published between 1989 and 2018 were examined; seven randomized controlled trials, six pretest-posttest studies and three non-randomized controlled studies. Sample sizes varied from 29 to 2682 participants, follow-up from four weeks to four years. Five types of interventions were identified: Case management, monetary support, referral enhancing, awareness & information focused and inpatient focused. Only two studies had access or use of community services as the primary outcome. Fourteen studies, representing all five types of interventions, had positive effects on one or more relevant outcomes. Two interventions had no effect on relevant outcomes.Conclusion: The included studies varied widely regarding design, type of intervention and outcomes. Based on this, the evidence base for interventions to enhance access to and use of formal community services is judged to be limited. The most studied type of intervention was case management. More research is recommended in this field.