Search

Background: Informal care features high on the policy agenda of many countries to deal with workforce shortages. As a consequence, care provision increasingly takes place in the care triad of care recipients, informal caregivers and care professionals. How collaboration between care partners takes shape depends on how the different partners perceive this collaboration. This paper aims to investigate the relative importance of the different aspects of collaboration from the perspectives of care recipients, informal caregivers and care professionals in the context of the care for older persons in The Netherlands. Methods: Using Q‐methodology, 32 participants ranked 28 statements that reflect different aspects of collaboration in the care triad and explained their ranking during a follow‐up interview. Participants comprised 9 older persons, 10 informal caregivers and 13 care professionals. Data were analysed using by‐person factor analysis to identify common patterns in the rankings of the statements. Emerging patterns were interpreted and described as views on collaboration using aggregated rankings and qualitative data from the interviews. Results: Five distinct views on collaboration were found: (1) Emphasizing warm collaboration, (2) trusting care professional's expertise, (3) open and compassionate care professionals, (4) responsive decision‐making by autonomous care professionals and (5) prioritizing care recipient's and informal caregiver's interests. Care recipients and/or informal caregivers were associated with views 1, 3 and, 5, whereas care professionals were associated with all five views. Conclusions: Our study highlights the importance of recognizing the potential diversity of views between and within different partner groups in care triads. Governmental and organizational policy makers, as well as healthcare professionals who aim to increase or support the involvement of informal caregivers, should take this heterogeneity into consideration. Patient or Public Contribution: An advisory board of older persons (care recipients and informal caregivers) was involved in the recruitment of the participants, the formulation of the statements and the reflection on the findings of the study and potential implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether people living with severe medically refractory epilepsy (PSRE) benefit from a seizure dog., Methods: An individual-level stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial was conducted. The study was conducted in the Netherlands among adults with daily to weekly seizures. All participants were included simultaneously (on June 1, 2019) while receiving usual care. Then, during the 36-month follow-up, they received a seizure dog in a randomized sequence. Participants kept a seizure diary and completed 3-monthly surveys. Seizure frequency was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included seizure-free days, seizure severity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and well-being. Data were analyzed using generalized linear mixed modeling (GLMM). The models assumed a delayed intervention effect, starting when the seizure dog reached an advanced stage of training. Effects were calculated as changes per 28-day period with the intervention., Results: Data were collected from 25 participants, of whom 20 crossed over to the intervention condition. The median follow-up was 19 months with usual care and 12 months with the intervention. On average, participants experienced 115 (SD 164) seizures per 28-day period in the usual care condition and 73 (SD 131) seizures in the intervention condition. Seven participants achieved a reduction of 50% or more at the end of follow-up. GLMM indicated a 3.1% decrease in seizure frequency for each consecutive 28-day period with the intervention (0.969, 95% CI 0.960-0.977). Furthermore, an increase in the number of seizure-free days was observed (1.012, 95% CI 1.009, 1.015), but no effect on seizure severity measured with the NHS3. Generic HRQoL scores improved, as reflected in the decrease in EQ-5D-5L utility decrement (0.975, 95% CI 0.954-0.997). Smaller improvements were observed on overall self-rated HRQoL, epilepsy-specific HRQoL, and well-being, measured with the EQ VAS, QOLIE-31-P, and ICECAP-A, respectively., Discussion: Seizure dogs reduce seizure frequency, increase the number of seizure-free days, and improve the quality of life of PSRE. The magnitude of the effect on generic HRQoL indicates that seizure dogs benefit PSRE beyond the impact on seizure frequency alone. Early discontinuation of seizure dog partnerships suggests that this intervention is not suitable for all PSRE and requires further study., Trial Registration Information: This study was registered in the Dutch Trial Register (NL6682) on November 28, 2017. Participants were enrolled on June 1, 2019., Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class III evidence that seizure dogs are associated with a decrease in seizure frequency in adult patients with medically refractory epilepsy.