Suchergebnisse

Background: Access to formal dementia care services varies widely within and across European countries. This paper presents Irish data from one study within the Access to Timely Formal Care (Actifcare) JPND-funded research project. This study explored the professional experiences, and perceived barriers and facilitators in accessing formal home- and community-based health and social care from the perspectives of healthcare professionals and expert stakeholders in a unique position to influence dementia policy in Ireland. Methods: An exploratory qualitative design with purposive sampling was used. Three focus groups were conducted with healthcare professionals from a variety of backgrounds (n=18; years experience M=11.35, SD=7.22). One group took place in a rural setting, one in south and one in north Dublin. Seven interviews with policy and political decision makers also took place. Discussions followed an agreed structure, were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed using inductive content analysis. Results: Narratives revealed a wide range of themes describing barriers and facilitators for the use of formal dementia care at (1) an individual level – relating to every person involved, such as needs-focused care and capacity and rights; (2) a system level – relating to the health and social care system in Ireland, such as service design, service availability and case management; and (3) overarching aspects that were important on both levels, such as education, awareness, influence and community engagement. Conflicting views emerged between healthcare professionals regarding the most appropriate time for care, and among experts regarding the definition and location of any case management support. Conclusions: These findings are interpreted in the context of the 2014 National Dementia Strategy and they support the increasing body of evidence that highlights the very clear gaps that exist between the formal home- and community-based care that is available in Ireland, and the care advocated for by health ...

Hintergrund: In der ersten Pandemiewelle im Frühjahr 2020 sind in den stationären Langzeitpflegeeinrichtungen überproportional viele Bewohner*innen und Mitarbeiter*innen an COVID-19 erkrankt und hatten den höchsten Anteil im Ausbruchsgeschehen. Leitungspersonen stationärer Altenpflegeeinrichtungen mussten pandemiebedingt teilweise täglich neue eigene Entscheidungen treffen sowie Entscheidungen übergeordneter Stellen interpretieren und integrieren. Ziel der Arbeit: Ziel war es zu beschreiben, welche Entscheidungen im Umgang mit der COVID-19-Pandemie von Leitungspersonen stationärer Altenpflegeeinrichtungen zu treffen waren, und welche Konsequenzen sich daraus ergaben. Material und Methoden: Es wurde ein qualitatives multizentrisches Querschnittdesign gewählt. Die Datenerhebung fand mittels semistrukturierter Telefoninterviews statt. Die aufgezeichneten Audiodaten wurden transkribiert, mittels Framework Analysis analysiert und in "peer debriefings" reflektiert. Ergebnisse: Es konnten 78 Interviews in 43 Pflegeeinrichtungen geführt werden. Es wurden 3 Hauptthemen mit 10 Subthemen identifiziert: Entscheidungen zu sozialer Teilhabe; Entscheidungen zu Quarantäne und Isolation und Anpassen des Personaleinsatzes. Diskussion: Gebraucht werden klarere Information und Anordnungen zur Umsetzung von Maßnahmen, z. B. durch bundesweit einheitliche Vorgaben. In der Informationspolitik werden auch die Gesundheitsämter in der Pflicht gesehen. Konsequenzen ihrer Entscheidungen waren für die Leitungspersonen kaum absehbar und von Unsicherheit geprägt. Verantwortlichkeiten für und Konsequenzen von Entscheidungen in der Pandemie sollten weiter evaluiert werden, um Leitungspersonen für Krisenzeiten zu stärken. ; Publikationsfonds MLU

The project is supported through the following funding organizations under the aegis of JPND - www.jpnd.eu. Germany, Ministry of Education and Research, Ireland, Health research board, Italy, Ministry of Health, the Netherlands, The Netherlands organization for Health Research and Development, Sweden, The Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, Norway, The Research Council of Norway, Portugal, Foundation for Science and Technology, (Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT - JPND-HC/0001/2012), United Kingdom, Economic and Social Research Council. JPND has read and approved of the protocol of the Actifcare study. ; Background: Previous findings indicate that people with dementia and their informal carers experience difficulties accessing and using formal care services due to a mismatch between needs and service use. This mismatch causes overall dissatisfaction and is a waste of the scarce financial care resources. This article presents the background and methods of the Actifcare (ACcess to Timely Formal Care) project. This is a European study aiming at best-practice development in finding timely access to formal care for community-dwelling people with dementia and their informal carers. There are five main objectives: 1) Explore predisposing and enabling factors associated with the use of formal care, 2) Explore the association between the use of formal care, needs and quality of life and 3) Compare these across European countries, 4) Understand the costs and consequences of formal care services utilization in people with unmet needs, 5) Determine the major costs and quality of life drivers and their relationship with formal care services across European countries. Methods: In a longitudinal cohort study conducted in eight European countries approximately 450 people with dementia and informal carers will be assessed three times in 1 year (baseline, 6 and 12 months). In this year we will closely monitor the process of finding access to formal care. Data on service use, quality of life and needs will be collected. Discussion: The results of Actifcare are expected to reveal best-practices in organizing formal care. Knowledge about enabling and predisposing factors regarding access to care services, as well as its costs and consequences, can advance the state of the art in health systems research into pathways to dementia care, in order to benefit people with dementia and their informal carers. ; publishersversion ; published

Background:With 10.5 million people with dementia in Europe and $301 billion associated costs, governments face challenges organizing access to care. Objective:To examine the costs related to formal and informal care use and quality of life for people with dementia in eight European countries, and explore the association with unmet needs. Methods:Cross-sectional data from 451 persons with dementia and their informal caregivers of the Actifcare cohort study were obtained. Formal and informal care use was multiplied by country specific unit prices of services. Needs were measured using the CANE and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of the person with dementia (both self- and proxy-rated) and informal caregiver's quality of life using EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-O, DEMQOL-U, and CarerQol utility scores. The association between costs and country, European region, and unmet needs was assessed using multi-level linear regression. Results:Self-rated EQ-5D-5L utility score was higher than proxy-rated (0.84 and 0.71, respectively). Informal caregivers' utility score was 0.84. Across eight countries annual mean costs of formal and informal care were approximately € 17,000. Unmet needs were not associated with annual costs of care, nor with proxy-rated HRQOL, but were associated with self-rated HRQOL. Conclusion:We found varying relationships between unmet needs and quality of life, and no association between unmet needs and care costs, although the results were sensitive to various factors. Future research should further investigate the relation between unmet needs, quality of life and costs to generate a better understanding of the effects of (un)timely access to care.

Background As part of the ActifCare (ACcess to Timely Formal Care) project, we conducted expert interviews in eight European countries with policy and political decision makers, or representatives of relevant institutions, to determine their perspectives on access to formal care for people with dementia and their carers. Methods Each ActifCare country (Germany, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom) conducted semi-structured interviews with 4–7 experts (total N = 38). The interview guide addressed the topics "Complexity and Continuity of Care", "Formal Services", and "Public Awareness". Country-specific analysis of interview transcripts used an inductive qualitative content analysis. Cross-national synthesis focused on similarities in themes across the ActifCare countries. Results The analysis revealed ten common themes and two additional sub-themes across countries. Among others, the experts highlighted the need for a coordinating role and the necessity of information to address issues of complexity and continuity of care, demanded person-centred, tailored, and multidisciplinary formal services, and referred to education, mass media and campaigns as means to raise public awareness. Conclusions Policy and political decision makers appear well acquainted with current discussions among both researchers and practitioners of possible approaches to improve access to dementia care. Experts described pragmatic, realistic strategies to influence dementia care. Suggested innovations concerned how to achieve improved dementia care, rather than transforming the nature of the services provided. Knowledge gained in these expert interviews may be useful to national decision makers when they consider reshaping the organisation of dementia care, and may thus help to develop best-practice strategies and recommendations.

Background: As part of the ActifCare (ACcess to Timely Formal Care) project, we conducted expert interviews in eight European countries with policy and political decision makers, or representatives of relevant institutions, to determine their perspectives on access to formal care for people with dementia and their carers. Methods: Each ActifCare country (Germany, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom) conducted semi-structured interviews with 4-7 experts (total N = 38). The interview guide addressed the topics "Complexity and Continuity of Care", "Formal Services", and "Public Awareness". Country-specific analysis of interview transcripts used an inductive qualitative content analysis. Cross-national synthesis focused on similarities in themes across the ActifCare countries. Results: The analysis revealed ten common themes and two additional sub-themes across countries. Among others, the experts highlighted the need for a coordinating role and the necessity of information to address issues of complexity and continuity of care, demanded person-centred, tailored, and multidisciplinary formal services, and referred to education, mass media and campaigns as means to raise public awareness. Conclusions: Policy and political decision makers appear well acquainted with current discussions among both researchers and practitioners of possible approaches to improve access to dementia care. Experts described pragmatic, realistic strategies to influence dementia care. Suggested innovations concerned how to achieve improved dementia care, rather than transforming the nature of the services provided. Knowledge gained in these expert interviews may be useful to national decision makers when they consider reshaping the organisation of dementia care, and may thus help to develop best-practice strategies and recommendations.

Background: As part of the ActifCare (ACcess to Timely Formal Care) project, we conducted expert interviews in eight European countries with policy and political decision makers, or representatives of relevant institutions, to determine their perspectives on access to formal care for people with dementia and their carers. Methods: Each ActifCare country (Germany, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom) conducted semi-structured interviews with 4-7 experts (total N = 38). The interview guide addressed the topics "Complexity and Continuity of Care", "Formal Services", and "Public Awareness". Country-specific analysis of interview transcripts used an inductive qualitative content analysis. Cross-national synthesis focused on similarities in themes across the ActifCare countries. Results: The analysis revealed ten common themes and two additional sub-themes across countries. Among others, the experts highlighted the need for a coordinating role and the necessity of information to address issues of complexity and continuity of care, demanded person-centred, tailored, and multidisciplinary formal services, and referred to education, mass media and campaigns as means to raise public awareness. Conclusions: Policy and political decision makers appear well acquainted with current discussions among both researchers and practitioners of possible approaches to improve access to dementia care. Experts described pragmatic, realistic strategies to influence dementia care. Suggested innovations concerned how to achieve improved dementia care, rather than transforming the nature of the services provided. Knowledge gained in these expert interviews may be useful to national decision makers when they consider reshaping the organisation of dementia care, and may thus help to develop best-practice strategies and recommendations. ; publishersversion ; published

Background: With 10.5 million people with dementia in Europe and $301 billion associated costs, governments face challenges organizing access to care. Objective: To examine the costs related to formal and informal care use and quality of life for people with dementia in eight European countries, and explore the association with unmet needs. Methods: Cross-sectional data from 451 persons with dementia and their informal caregivers of the Actifcare cohort study were obtained. Formal and informal care use was multiplied by country specific unit prices of services. Needs were measured using the CANE and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of the person with dementia (both self- and proxy-rated) and informal caregiver's quality of life using EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-O, DEMQOL-U, and CarerQol utility scores. The association between costs and country, European region, and unmet needs was assessed using multi-level linear regression. Results: Self-rated EQ-5D-5L utility score was higher than proxy-rated (0.84 and 0.71, respectively). Informal caregivers' utility score was 0.84. Across eight countries annual mean costs of formal and informal care were approximately (sic)17,000. Unmet needs were not associated with annual costs of care, nor with proxy-rated HRQOL, but were associated with self-rated HRQOL. Conclusion: We found varying relationships between unmet needs and quality of life, and no association between unmet needs and care costs, although the results were sensitive to various factors. Future research should further investigate the relation between unmet needs, quality of life and costs to generate a better understanding of the effects of (un)timely access to care.