Search

OBJECTIVES: Children with brain cancer and their families have complex care needs throughout diagnosis, active treatment, long-term survivorship, and the palliative phase of illness. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of Australian specialist clinicians on barriers and facilitators to health care for children with brain cancer and their families. METHODS: A qualitative approach was taken using semi-structured interviews. Eligible participants were clinicians of any discipline providing care to children with brain cancer and their families in Australia. Interviews were conducted by telephone and asked about perceived strengths and weaknesses in health care and available resources for this population. Qualitative content analysis used a directed approach with inductive refinement. RESULTS: Eleven clinicians participated, 5 of whom were medical, 3 nursing, and 3 allied health. The overarching theme was that the rarity and diversity of brain tumors in children confers challenges to care that lead to variation in practice. Participants reported having to adapt care from guidelines and patient/family resources designed for adults with brain cancer and children with other cancers, and rely on clinical and research networks. Specialist comprehensive cancer care was generally perceived to offer the best model for accommodating the unique needs of each child/family, but barriers to access were highlighted for children in remote Australia, and long-term follow-up was perceived to be inadequate regardless of where children lived. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Until further brain cancer-specific paediatric guidelines become available, our findings highlight the need for communities of practice to share resources and reduce unwarranted variation. CONCLUSION: Future research should focus on developing and evaluating guidelines and other resources specific to children with brain cancer, as well as informing suitable models for long-term follow-up care for survivors.

OBJECTIVES: Children with brain cancer and their families have complex care needs throughout diagnosis, active treatment, long-term survivorship, and the palliative phase of illness. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of Australian specialist clinicians on barriers and facilitators to health care for children with brain cancer and their families. METHODS: A qualitative approach was taken using semi-structured interviews. Eligible participants were clinicians of any discipline providing care to children with brain cancer and their families in Australia. Interviews were conducted by telephone and asked about perceived strengths and weaknesses in health care and available resources for this population. Qualitative content analysis used a directed approach with inductive refinement. RESULTS: Eleven clinicians participated, 5 of whom were medical, 3 nursing, and 3 allied health. The overarching theme was that the rarity and diversity of brain tumors in children confers challenges to care that lead to variation in practice. Participants reported having to adapt care from guidelines and patient/family resources designed for adults with brain cancer and children with other cancers, and rely on clinical and research networks. Specialist comprehensive cancer care was generally perceived to offer the best model for accommodating the unique needs of each child/family, but barriers to access were highlighted for children in remote Australia, and long-term follow-up was perceived to be inadequate regardless of where children lived. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Until further brain cancer-specific paediatric guidelines become available, our findings highlight the need for communities of practice to share resources and reduce unwarranted variation. CONCLUSION: Future research should focus on developing and evaluating guidelines and other resources specific to children with brain cancer, as well as informing suitable models for long-term follow-up care for survivors.

INTRODUCTION: This systematic review aims to summarise the available literature on the effect of geriatric assessment (multidimensional health assessment across medical, social, and functional domains; "GA") or comprehensive geriatric assessment (geriatric assessment with intervention or management recommendations; "CGA") compared to usual care for older adults with cancer on care received, treatment completion, adverse treatment effects, survival and health-related quality of life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PubMed was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials or prospective cohort comparison studies on the effect of GA/CGA on care received, treatment, and cancer outcomes for older adults with cancer. RESULTS: Ten studies were included: seven randomised controlled trials (RCTs), two phase II randomised pilot studies, and one prospective cohort comparison study. All studies included older adults receiving systemic therapy, mostly chemotherapy, for mixed cancer types (eight studies), colorectal cancer (one study), and non-small cell lung cancer (one study). Integrating GA/CGA into oncological care increased treatment completion (three of nine studies), reduced grade 3+ chemotherapy toxicity (two of five studies), and improved quality of life scores (four of five studies). No studies found significant differences in survival between GA/CGA and usual care. GA/CGA incorporated into care decisions prompted less intensive treatment and greater non-oncological interventions, including supportive care strategies. DISCUSSION: GA/CGA integrated into the care of an older adult with cancer has the potential to optimise care decisions, which may lead to reduced treatment toxicity, increased treatment completion, and improved health-related quality of life scores.

Background: Advanced dementia is a life-limiting illness that requires a palliative approach to care. Decline in eating/drinking represents a milestone in progression that warrants decision-making and planning of care. In long-term care (LTC), this is best conducted via family case conferences. Aim: To explore decision-making and planning regarding eating/drinking-related care in case conferences for persons with advanced dementia in LTC to inform future practice. Methods: A qualitative approach was taken, using observation of audio-recorded case conferences. Case conferences were conducted in 6 LTC facilities within the intervention arm of a cluster randomized controlled trial. Participants were LTC personnel, doctors, and families of persons with advanced dementia. Content was analysed for eating/drinking-related goals of care and the degree to which decision-making was shared. Findings: Thirty-two case conferences considered eating/drinking-related care. The goals included nutrition, hydration, weight gain and maintenance, food enjoyment, social interaction, and independence. Key considerations included secondary health issues impacting comfort, and tensions between food enjoyment versus nutrition and risk of aspiration. While families contributed essential information about eating/drinking history, sometimes decision-making was dominated by professionals and overlooked overall goals of care. Discussion: Shared decision-making regarding eating/drinking-related care for persons with advanced dementia in LTC should start with consensus on overall goals of care and include contributions to quality of life as well as risks. Family involvement should be supported beyond information-giving. Conclusion: Future studies are needed to identify the most sensitive and understandable ways for families of discussing eating/drinking-related decline in dementia.

Background: Advanced dementia is a life-limiting illness that requires a palliative approach to care. Decline in eating/drinking represents a milestone in progression that warrants decision-making and planning of care. In long-term care (LTC), this is best conducted via family case conferences. Aim: To explore decision-making and planning regarding eating/drinking-related care in case conferences for persons with advanced dementia in LTC to inform future practice. Methods: A qualitative approach was taken, using observation of audio-recorded case conferences. Case conferences were conducted in 6 LTC facilities within the intervention arm of a cluster randomized controlled trial. Participants were LTC personnel, doctors, and families of persons with advanced dementia. Content was analysed for eating/drinking-related goals of care and the degree to which decision-making was shared. Findings: Thirty-two case conferences considered eating/drinking-related care. The goals included nutrition, hydration, weight gain and maintenance, food enjoyment, social interaction, and independence. Key considerations included secondary health issues impacting comfort, and tensions between food enjoyment versus nutrition and risk of aspiration. While families contributed essential information about eating/drinking history, sometimes decision-making was dominated by professionals and overlooked overall goals of care. Discussion: Shared decision-making regarding eating/drinking-related care for persons with advanced dementia in LTC should start with consensus on overall goals of care and include contributions to quality of life as well as risks. Family involvement should be supported beyond information-giving. Conclusion: Future studies are needed to identify the most sensitive and understandable ways for families of discussing eating/drinking-related decline in dementia.

Background: Advanced dementia is a life-limiting illness that requires a palliative approach to care. Decline in eating/drinking represents a milestone in progression that warrants decision-making and planning of care. In long-term care (LTC), this is best conducted via family case conferences. Aim: To explore decision-making and planning regarding eating/drinking-related care in case conferences for persons with advanced dementia in LTC to inform future practice. Methods: A qualitative approach was taken, using observation of audio-recorded case conferences. Case conferences were conducted in 6 LTC facilities within the intervention arm of a cluster randomized controlled trial. Participants were LTC personnel, doctors, and families of persons with advanced dementia. Content was analysed for eating/drinking-related goals of care and the degree to which decision-making was shared. Findings: Thirty-two case conferences considered eating/drinking-related care. The goals included nutrition, hydration, weight gain and maintenance, food enjoyment, social interaction, and independence. Key considerations included secondary health issues impacting comfort, and tensions between food enjoyment versus nutrition and risk of aspiration. While families contributed essential information about eating/drinking history, sometimes decision-making was dominated by professionals and overlooked overall goals of care. Discussion: Shared decision-making regarding eating/drinking-related care for persons with advanced dementia in LTC should start with consensus on overall goals of care and include contributions to quality of life as well as risks. Family involvement should be supported beyond information-giving. Conclusion: Future studies are needed to identify the most sensitive and understandable ways for families of discussing eating/drinking-related decline in dementia.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic uncertainty and the need for proxy decision-making owing to cognitive impairment in advanced dementia, adds complexity to end-of-life care planning within the long-term care setting. Case conferences provide a structure to facilitate difficult conversations and an opportunity for family and clinicians to engage in prospective planning, and reach agreement on goals of end-of-life care. OBJECTIVE: To explore interactions between multidisciplinary healthcare clinicians and families during facilitated case conferences on end-of-life care for residents with advanced dementia. METHODS: A qualitative approach was used. Transcripts of audio-recorded case conferences facilitated by a trained registered nurse were coded by two independent researchers and analysed inductively. Transcripts were selected from an available pool until thematic saturation was reached. Emerging themes were confirmed with the wider research group. RESULTS: Thematic saturation was reached after 25 transcripts. An overarching theme concerned the ways in which clinicians and families bridged medical and person-centred perspectives. Subthemes included: details of day-to-day care versus establishing overall goals of care; expression of emotion versus retreat from emotion; and missed opportunities versus expressed cues. Successful facilitation served to 'bridge the gap' between family and clinicians. CONCLUSION: Facilitation of case conferences for residents with advanced dementia should focus on ensuring that: clinicians do not miss opportunities to discuss end-of-life care; discussions on the minutiae of care regularly return to the resident's broader goals of care; and information on dementia and treatments provided by clinicians is integrated with advice by family members regarding the resident's premorbid values and likely preferences.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic uncertainty and the need for proxy decision-making owing to cognitive impairment in advanced dementia, adds complexity to end-of-life care planning within the long-term care setting. Case conferences provide a structure to facilitate difficult conversations and an opportunity for family and clinicians to engage in prospective planning, and reach agreement on goals of end-of-life care. OBJECTIVE: To explore interactions between multidisciplinary healthcare clinicians and families during facilitated case conferences on end-of-life care for residents with advanced dementia. METHODS: A qualitative approach was used. Transcripts of audio-recorded case conferences facilitated by a trained registered nurse were coded by two independent researchers and analysed inductively. Transcripts were selected from an available pool until thematic saturation was reached. Emerging themes were confirmed with the wider research group. RESULTS: Thematic saturation was reached after 25 transcripts. An overarching theme concerned the ways in which clinicians and families bridged medical and person-centred perspectives. Subthemes included: details of day-to-day care versus establishing overall goals of care; expression of emotion versus retreat from emotion; and missed opportunities versus expressed cues. Successful facilitation served to 'bridge the gap' between family and clinicians. CONCLUSION: Facilitation of case conferences for residents with advanced dementia should focus on ensuring that: clinicians do not miss opportunities to discuss end-of-life care; discussions on the minutiae of care regularly return to the resident's broader goals of care; and information on dementia and treatments provided by clinicians is integrated with advice by family members regarding the resident's premorbid values and likely preferences.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic uncertainty and the need for proxy decision-making owing to cognitive impairment in advanced dementia, adds complexity to end-of-life care planning within the long-term care setting. Case conferences provide a structure to facilitate difficult conversations and an opportunity for family and clinicians to engage in prospective planning, and reach agreement on goals of end-of-life care. OBJECTIVE: To explore interactions between multidisciplinary healthcare clinicians and families during facilitated case conferences on end-of-life care for residents with advanced dementia. METHODS: A qualitative approach was used. Transcripts of audio-recorded case conferences facilitated by a trained registered nurse were coded by two independent researchers and analysed inductively. Transcripts were selected from an available pool until thematic saturation was reached. Emerging themes were confirmed with the wider research group. RESULTS: Thematic saturation was reached after 25 transcripts. An overarching theme concerned the ways in which clinicians and families bridged medical and person-centred perspectives. Subthemes included: details of day-to-day care versus establishing overall goals of care; expression of emotion versus retreat from emotion; and missed opportunities versus expressed cues. Successful facilitation served to 'bridge the gap' between family and clinicians. CONCLUSION: Facilitation of case conferences for residents with advanced dementia should focus on ensuring that: clinicians do not miss opportunities to discuss end-of-life care; discussions on the minutiae of care regularly return to the resident's broader goals of care; and information on dementia and treatments provided by clinicians is integrated with advice by family members regarding the resident's premorbid values and likely preferences.

Background: A primary brain cancer diagnosis is a distressing, life changing event. It adversely affects the quality of life for the person living with brain cancer and their families (‘carers’). Timely access to evidence-based information is critical to enabling people living with brain cancer, and their carers, to self-manage the devastating impacts of this disease. Method: A systematic environmental scan of web-based resources. A depersonalised search for online English-language resources published from 2009 to December 2019 and designed for adults (> 25 years of age), living with primary brain cancer, was undertaken using the Google search engine. The online information was classified according to: 1) the step on the cancer care continuum; 2) self-management domains (PRISMS taxonomy); 3) basic information disclosure (Silberg criteria); 4) independent quality verification (HonCode); 5) reliability of disease and treatment information (DISCERN Sections 1 and 2); and readability (Flesch-Kincaid reading grade). Results: A total of 119 online resources were identified, most originating in England (n = 49); Australia (n = 27); or the USA (n = 27). The majority of resources related to active treatment (n = 76), without addressing recurrence (n = 3), survivorship (n = 1) or palliative care needs (n = 13). Few online resources directly provided self-management advice for adults living with brain cancer or their carers. Just over a fifth (n = 26, 22%) were underpinned by verifiable evidence. Only one quarter of organisations producing resources were HonCode certified (n = 9, 24%). The median resource reliability as measured by Section 1, DISCERN tool, was 56%. A median of 8.8 years of education was required to understand these online resources. Conclusions: More targeted online information is needed to provide people affected by brain cancer with practical self-management advice. Resources need to better address patient and carer needs related to: rehabilitation, managing

Background: Trials of interventions for delirium in various patient populations report disparate outcomes and measures but little is known about those used in palliative care trials. A core outcome set promotes consistency of outcome selection and measurement. Aim: To inform core outcome set development by examining outcomes, their definitions, measures and time-points in published palliative care studies of delirium prevention or treatment delirium interventions. Design: Prospectively registered systematic review adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Data sources: We searched six electronic databases (1980–November 2020) for original studies, three for relevant reviews and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for unpublished studies and ongoing trials. We included randomised, quasi-randomised and non-randomised intervention studies of pharmacological and non-pharmacological delirium prevention and/or treatment interventions. Results: From 13/3244 studies (2863 adult participants), we identified 9 delirium-specific and 13 non-delirium specific outcome domains within eight Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy categories. There were multiple and varied outcomes and time points in each domain. The commonest delirium specific outcome was delirium severity (n = 7), commonly using the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (6/8 studies, 75%). Four studies reported delirium incidence. Non-delirium specific outcomes included mortality, agitation, adverse events, other symptoms and quality of life. Conclusion: The review identified few delirium interventions with heterogeneity in outcomes, their definition and measurement, highlighting the need for a uniform approach. Findings will inform the next stage to develop consensus for a core outcome set to inform delirium interventional palliative care research.

Background

Method

Results

Conclusions

Background: Access to palliative care in the community enables people to live in their preferred place of care, which is often home. Community palliative care services struggle to provide timely 24-h services to patients and family. This has resulted in calls for ‘accessible and flexible’ models of care that are ‘responsive’ to peoples’ changing palliative care needs. Digital health technologies provide opportunities to meet these requirements 24-h a day. Aim: To identify digital health technologies that have been evaluated for supporting timely assessment and management of people living at home with palliative care needs and/or their carer(s), and the evidence-base for each. Design: A systematic review of systematic reviews (‘meta-review’). Systematic reviews evaluating evidence for virtual models of palliative or end-of-life care using one or more digital health technologies were included. Systematic reviews were evaluated using the Risk of Bias Tool for Systematic Reviews. A narrative approach was used to synthesise results. Data sources:Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Database of systematic reviews were searched for English-language reviews published between 2015 and 2020. Results: The search yielded 2266 articles, of which 12 systematic reviews met criteria. Sixteen reviews were included in total, after four reviews were found via handsearching. Other than scheduled telehealth, video-conferencing, or after-hours telephone support, little evidence was found for digital health technologies used to deliver virtual models of palliative care. Conclusions: There are opportunities to test new models of virtual care, beyond telehealth and/or video conferencing, such as 24-h command centres, and rapid response teams.

Background: Access to palliative care in the community enables people to live in their preferred place of care, which is often home. Community palliative care services struggle to provide timely 24-h services to patients and family. This has resulted in calls for ‘accessible and flexible’ models of care that are ‘responsive’ to peoples’ changing palliative care needs. Digital health technologies provide opportunities to meet these requirements 24-h a day. Aim: To identify digital health technologies that have been evaluated for supporting timely assessment and management of people living at home with palliative care needs and/or their carer(s), and the evidence-base for each. Design: A systematic review of systematic reviews (‘meta-review’). Systematic reviews evaluating evidence for virtual models of palliative or end-of-life care using one or more digital health technologies were included. Systematic reviews were evaluated using the Risk of Bias Tool for Systematic Reviews. A narrative approach was used to synthesise results. Data sources:Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Database of systematic reviews were searched for English-language reviews published between 2015 and 2020. Results: The search yielded 2266 articles, of which 12 systematic reviews met criteria. Sixteen reviews were included in total, after four reviews were found via handsearching. Other than scheduled telehealth, video-conferencing, or after-hours telephone support, little evidence was found for digital health technologies used to deliver virtual models of palliative care. Conclusions: There are opportunities to test new models of virtual care, beyond telehealth and/or video conferencing, such as 24-h command centres, and rapid response teams.

Background: Access to palliative care in the community enables people to live in their preferred place of care, which is often home. Community palliative care services struggle to provide timely 24-h services to patients and family. This has resulted in calls for ‘accessible and flexible’ models of care that are ‘responsive’ to peoples’ changing palliative care needs. Digital health technologies provide opportunities to meet these requirements 24-h a day. Aim: To identify digital health technologies that have been evaluated for supporting timely assessment and management of people living at home with palliative care needs and/or their carer(s), and the evidence-base for each. Design: A systematic review of systematic reviews (‘meta-review’). Systematic reviews evaluating evidence for virtual models of palliative or end-of-life care using one or more digital health technologies were included. Systematic reviews were evaluated using the Risk of Bias Tool for Systematic Reviews. A narrative approach was used to synthesise results. Data sources:Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Database of systematic reviews were searched for English-language reviews published between 2015 and 2020. Results: The search yielded 2266 articles, of which 12 systematic reviews met criteria. Sixteen reviews were included in total, after four reviews were found via handsearching. Other than scheduled telehealth, video-conferencing, or after-hours telephone support, little evidence was found for digital health technologies used to deliver virtual models of palliative care. Conclusions: There are opportunities to test new models of virtual care, beyond telehealth and/or video conferencing, such as 24-h command centres, and rapid response teams.

PURPOSE:This study aimed to explore medication-related decision-making by health professionals from different disciplines and specialties caring for people with advanced dementia living in long-term care facilities, focusing on dilemmas associated with starting, continuing or deprescribing medications commonly regarded as potentially inappropriate. METHODS:Four focus groups were undertaken, each on a different medication type (antibiotics, lipid-lowering agents, opioids and acetylcholinesterase inhibitors). Transcripts underwent qualitative analysis using line by line inductive coding and then a person-centred framework to highlight themes across medication types. RESULTS:Sixteen participants participated in focus groups. Regardless of medication type or dilemma, results suggested decision-making for residents with advanced dementia should begin with discussing goals of care and engaging with families, and be viewed as an iterative process involving regular monitoring and adjustment. Decision-making was seen as requiring a dialectical approach involving multiple perspectives, with an emphasis on establishing communication between health professionals, family and the person with dementia to better understand goals/preferences for care. CONCLUSION:Inter-professional collaboration enables sharing of clinical experience/expertise, differing disciplinary perspectives and knowledge about the resident. Continuing a medication should be considered an active decision that carries as much responsibility as starting or deprescribing.

© 2019, Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Background Medication reviews by pharmacists have been shown to identify and reduce drug-related problems in long-term care residents. Objective To explore pharmacist perspectives of the Australian Government funded pharmacist-conducted residential medication management review and its role improving the quality and safety of prescribing in long-term care, in particular for those living with advanced dementia. Setting Australian Long-term care pharmacists. Method A qualitative research methodology approach using semi-structured interviews was used, with participants pharmacists with Residential Medication Management Review experience. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and coded utilising a meta-model of Physician-Community Pharmacy Collaboration in medication review. Main outcome measure Pharmacists’ perspectives on the Residential Medication Management Review and how to improve the quality of reviews for residents with advanced dementia. Results Fifteen accredited pharmacists participated. The majority believed that the Residential Medication Management Review had the potential to improve the quality and safety of medicines but highlighted systemic issues that worked against collaborative practice. Participants emphasised the importance of three-way collaboration between general practitioners, pharmacists and nursing staff and highlighted key strategies for its optimisation. Conclusion Incorporating avenues for greater communication between team members can improve collaboration between health professionals and ultimately the quality of medication reviews.

© 2018, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Background: Prescribing medications for nursing home residents with advanced dementia should focus on optimizing function and comfort, reducing unnecessary harms and aligning care goals with a palliative approach. Objective: The aim of the study was to estimate the proportion of Australian nursing home residents with advanced dementia receiving potentially inappropriate medications, and identify those most commonly prescribed and factors associated with their use. Design: Data were collected through retrospective audit of medication charts. Setting/Subjects: Two hundred eighteen nursing home residents with advanced dementia from 20 nursing homes participated in a cluster-randomized controlled trial of case conferencing (the IDEAL Study) from June 2013 to December 2014. Measurements: Inappropriate drug use was defined as medications classified as "never appropriate" by the Palliative Excellence in Alzheimer Care Efforts (PEACE) program criteria. Generalized linear mixed models were used to identify variables predicting use of "never" appropriate medications. Results: Over a quarter (n = 65, 30%) of residents received at least one medication classed as "never" appropriate, the most common being lipid-lowering agents (n = 38, 17.4%), antiplatelet agents (n = 18, 8.3%), and acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (n = 16, 7.3%). Residents who had been at the nursing home for ≤10 months (odds ratio [OR] 5.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.74-18.06) and 11-21 months (OR 5.41, 95% CI 1.67-17.75) had significantly greater odds of receiving a never appropriate medication compared with residents who had been at the nursing home for >5 years. Conclusions: Use of potentially inappropriate medications in Australian nursing home residents with advanced dementia is common. A greater understanding of the rationale that underpins prescribing of medications is required.

© 2018, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Background: Prescribing medications for nursing home residents with advanced dementia should focus on optimizing function and comfort, reducing unnecessary harms and aligning care goals with a palliative approach. Objective: The aim of the study was to estimate the proportion of Australian nursing home residents with advanced dementia receiving potentially inappropriate medications, and identify those most commonly prescribed and factors associated with their use. Design: Data were collected through retrospective audit of medication charts. Setting/Subjects: Two hundred eighteen nursing home residents with advanced dementia from 20 nursing homes participated in a cluster-randomized controlled trial of case conferencing (the IDEAL Study) from June 2013 to December 2014. Measurements: Inappropriate drug use was defined as medications classified as "never appropriate" by the Palliative Excellence in Alzheimer Care Efforts (PEACE) program criteria. Generalized linear mixed models were used to identify variables predicting use of "never" appropriate medications. Results: Over a quarter (n = 65, 30%) of residents received at least one medication classed as "never" appropriate, the most common being lipid-lowering agents (n = 38, 17.4%), antiplatelet agents (n = 18, 8.3%), and acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (n = 16, 7.3%). Residents who had been at the nursing home for ≤10 months (odds ratio [OR] 5.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.74-18.06) and 11-21 months (OR 5.41, 95% CI 1.67-17.75) had significantly greater odds of receiving a never appropriate medication compared with residents who had been at the nursing home for >5 years. Conclusions: Use of potentially inappropriate medications in Australian nursing home residents with advanced dementia is common. A greater understanding of the rationale that underpins prescribing of medications is required.

© 2016 The Author(s). Background: Systems for identifying potentially inappropriate medications in older adults are not immediately transferrable to advanced dementia, where the management goal is palliation. The aim of the systematic review was to identify and synthesise published systems and make recommendations for identifying potentially inappropriate prescribing in advanced dementia. Methods: Studies were included if published in a peer-reviewed English language journal and concerned with identifying the appropriateness or otherwise of medications in advanced dementia or dementia and palliative care. The quality of each study was rated using the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist. Synthesis was narrative due to heterogeneity among designs and measures. Medline (OVID), CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005 - August 2014) and AMED were searched in October 2014. Reference lists of relevant reviews and included articles were searched manually. Results: Eight studies were included, all of which were scored a high quality using the STROBE checklist. Five studies used the same system developed by the Palliative Excellence in Alzheimer Care Efforts (PEACE) Program. One study used number of medications as an index, and two studies surveyed health professionals' opinions on appropriateness of specific medications in different clinical scenarios. Conclusions: Future research is needed to develop and validate systems with clinical utility for improving safety and quality of prescribing in advanced dementia. Systems should account for individual clinical context and distinguish between deprescribing and initiation of medications.

© 2016 The Author(s). Background: Systems for identifying potentially inappropriate medications in older adults are not immediately transferrable to advanced dementia, where the management goal is palliation. The aim of the systematic review was to identify and synthesise published systems and make recommendations for identifying potentially inappropriate prescribing in advanced dementia. Methods: Studies were included if published in a peer-reviewed English language journal and concerned with identifying the appropriateness or otherwise of medications in advanced dementia or dementia and palliative care. The quality of each study was rated using the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist. Synthesis was narrative due to heterogeneity among designs and measures. Medline (OVID), CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005 - August 2014) and AMED were searched in October 2014. Reference lists of relevant reviews and included articles were searched manually. Results: Eight studies were included, all of which were scored a high quality using the STROBE checklist. Five studies used the same system developed by the Palliative Excellence in Alzheimer Care Efforts (PEACE) Program. One study used number of medications as an index, and two studies surveyed health professionals' opinions on appropriateness of specific medications in different clinical scenarios. Conclusions: Future research is needed to develop and validate systems with clinical utility for improving safety and quality of prescribing in advanced dementia. Systems should account for individual clinical context and distinguish between deprescribing and initiation of medications.

An analysis of 21 military acquisition programs to see how closely original estimates of cost and performance compare with actual outcomes, and whether there has been any improvement in estimating outcomes in the 1960s over the preceding decade. Quantitative findings are reported as ratios of actual results to initial estimates based on the Technical Development Plan. Cost growth seemed to be the result of adjustments of target goal. Estimates seemed to be somewhat less biased toward optimism in the 1960s, but it is uncertain whether this was due to improved estimating or to improved control of program fluctuations. Performance characteristics factor numbers had a broad distribution, with some better than expected outcomes but also with some sizable shortfalls. The research indicates the need for continuing efforts to control the cost, schedule, and article performance outcomes of programs and for better understanding of the causes for program growth. (Author)