| 31. |
- Bieber, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Access to community care for people with dementia and their informal carers : Case vignettes for a European comparison of structures and common pathways to formalcare [Zugang zu professioneller Unterstützung für Menschen mit Demenz und ihre Angehörigen: Fallvignetten für den europäischen Vergleich von Strukturen und Zugangswegen zu professioneller Pflege]
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie (Print). - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0948-6704 .- 1435-1269. ; 51:5, s. 530-536
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundPeople with dementia and their informal carers often do not receive appropriate professional support or it is not received at the right time.ObjectivesDescription and comparison of common pathways to formal community dementia care in eight European countries as a part of the transnational Actifcare project.Materials and methodsThe German team was responsible for creating an individual case scenario as a starting point. The research teams in Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, and the United Kingdom were then asked to describe a common pathway to formal dementia care by writing their own vignette using the provided individual case scenario.ResultsA transnational qualitative content analysis was used to identify the following categories as being the most important: involved professionals, dementia-specific and team-based approaches, proactive roles, and financial aspects. General practitioners (GPs) are described as being the most important profession supporting the access to formal care in all the involved countries. In some countries other professionals take over responsibility for the access procedure. Dementia-specific approaches are rarely part of standard care; team-based approaches have differing significances in each of the countries. Informal carers are mainly proactive in seeking formal care. The Nordic countries demonstrate how financial support enhances access to the professional system.ConclusionEnhanced cooperation between GPs and other professions might optimize access to formal dementia care. Team-based approaches focusing on dementia care should be developed further. Informal carers should be supported and relieved in their role. Financial barriers remain which should be further investigated and reduced.
|
|
| 32. |
- Haaksma, Miriam L., et al.
(författare)
-
The Impact of Frailty and Comorbidity on Institutionalization and Mortality in Persons With Dementia : A Prospective Cohort Study
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. - : Elsevier BV. - 1525-8610 .- 1538-9375. ; 20:2, s. 165-170
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: The predictive value of frailty and comorbidity, in addition to more readily available information, is not widely studied. We determined the incremental predictive value of frailty and comorbidity for mortality and institutionalization across both short and long prediction periods in persons with dementia.Design: Longitudinal clinical cohort study with a follow-up of institutionalization and mortality occurrence across 7 years after baseline.Setting and Participants: 331 newly diagnosed dementia patients, originating from 3 Alzheimer centers (Amsterdam, Maastricht, and Nijmegen) in the Netherlands, contributed to the Clinical Course of Cognition and Comorbidity (4C) Study.Measures: We measured comorbidity burden using the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics (CIRS-G) and constructed a Frailty Index (FI) based on 35 items. Time-to-death and time-to-institutionalization from dementia diagnosis onward were verified through linkage to the Dutch population registry.Results: After 7 years, 131 patients were institutionalized and 160 patients had died. Compared with a previously developed prediction model for survival in dementia, our Cox regression model showed a significant improvement in model concordance (U) after the addition of baseline CIRS-G or FI when examining mortality across 3 years (FI: U = 0.178, P = .005, CIRS-G: U = 0.180, P = .012), but not for mortality across 6 years (FI: U = 0.068, P = .176, CIRS-G: U = 0.084, P = .119). In a competing risk regression model for time-to-institutionalization, baseline CIRS-G and FI did not improve the prediction across any of the periods.Conclusions: Characteristics such as frailty and comorbidity change over time and therefore their predictive value is likely maximized in the short term. These results call for a shift in our approach to prognostic modeling for chronic diseases, focusing on yearly predictions rather than a single prediction across multiple years. Our findings underline the importance of considering possible fluctuations in predictors over time by performing regular longitudinal assessments in future studies as well as in clinical practice.
|
|
| 33. |
|
|
| 34. |
|
|
| 35. |
|
|
| 36. |
|
|
| 37. |
|
|
