Search

Background: Dementia Care Navigators (DCNs) are professionals without clinical training, who provide individualised emotional and practical support to people living with dementia, working alongside clinical services. Navigator services have been implemented but the service offered vary without a consistent overview provided. The aim of this narrative systematic review was to describe and compare existing service formats, and to synthesise evidence regarding their implementation and impacts. Methods: The review was registered on PROSPERO [CRD42021292518]. Three electronic databases were searched and included studies reported on a DCN service, defined as a service in which non‐clinically trained workers provide personalised advice and support to people with dementia and/or carers in the community. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and titles and read through full papers for inclusion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Standard Quality Assessment QualSyst. Results: We included 14 papers reporting on six studies. All services were US‐based and only varied by integration and training provided. Studies reported different degrees of impact on service utilisation and on symptoms and mental well‐being of people with dementia and their carers, with too little evidence to draw substantial/meaningful conclusions and studies employing different outcome measures. One study evidenced greater impacts on people with more advanced dementia compared to earlier stages. Conclusions: DCN services have the potential to effectively provide non‐clinical support to people with dementia and carers from the point of diagnosis. Further research from countries other than the USA, focusing on the impact on social care and social support service access and utilisation, and utilising similar established outcome measures are required. Key points: Evidence on the impact of Dementia Care Navigators (DCNs) is limited but shows promising benefits for people living with dementia and their carers.More research needs to be conducted in countries other than the US, where all evidence was reported, and with similar outcome measures to allow comparison.DCNs are a highly useful professional group without medical training, who can navigate people living with dementia and their carers to support and provide support themselves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Positive person-centered attributes of inpatient rehabilitation need to be identified from the patient's perspective to be further developed and sustained. Purpose: To identify which attributes patients openly evoke as being great care experiences, using an open appreciative inquiry during the inpatient rehabilitation stay. Methods: Qualitative secondary analysis of appreciative patient comments during a bedside patient experience rounding facilitated by a neutral party was performed. Two independent analysts employed an inductive, summative form of content analysis. Results: Among 150 patients rounded, 122 provided categorizable appreciative accounts. Over two-thirds of the patients (67.2%) focused on "staff attributes" in their great-experience accounts. Those attributes were mostly interpersonal such as being "attentive & caring—beyond clinical duty" and being "encouraging (but not too hard) & reassuring". These interpersonal staff attributes were reported with words showing deep levels of personal significance or patient appreciation. Beyond staff attributes, the perceived quality of "patient care" (31.1%) and opportunities for "leisure and social activities" (9.0%) were also frequently evoked. Amenities like food or customer service were the least evoked, rarely so as an exclusive attribute (0.8% for each). Conclusions: The human(e) factor, especially the interpersonal qualities of staff, emerged as greatly appreciated from the patient experience perspective during inpatient rehabilitation. These experiences help identify which person-centered attributes of care might be further developed and sustained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To explore (1) differences in validity and feasibility ratings for geriatric surgical standards across a diverse stakeholder group (surgeons vs. nonsurgeons, health care providers vs. nonproviders, including patient-family, advocacy, and regulatory agencies); (2) whether three multidisciplinary discussion subgroups would reach similar conclusions.Data Source/study Setting: Primary data (ratings) were reported from 58 stakeholder organizations.Study Design: An adaptation of the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Methodology (RAM) process was conducted in May 2016.Data Collection/extraction Methods: Stakeholders self-administered ratings on paper, returned via mail (Round 1) and in-person (Round 2).Principal Findings: In Round 1, surgeons rated standards more critically (91.2 percent valid; 64.9 percent feasible) than nonsurgeons (100 percent valid; 87.0 percent feasible) but increased ratings in Round 2 (98.7 percent valid; 90.6 percent feasible), aligning with nonsurgeons (99.7 percent valid; 96.1 percent feasible). Three parallel subgroups rated validity at 96.8 percent (group 1), 100 percent (group 2), and 97.4 percent (group 3). Feasibility ratings were 76.9 percent (group 1), 96.1 percent (group 2), and 92.2 percent (group 3).Conclusions: There are differences in validity and feasibility ratings by health professions, with surgeons rating standards more critically than nonsurgeons. However, three separate discussion subgroups rated a high proportion (96-100 percent) of standards as valid, indicating the RAM can be successfully applied to a large stakeholder group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: It remains unknown whether high-functioning teams can compensate for poor continuity of care to support important patient outcomes.Data Source: Linked VA administrative and Medicare claims data to measure the relationship of team-based care and continuity of care with high-cost utilization.Study Design: Retrospective cohort study of 1.2 million VA-Medicare dual eligible Veterans assigned to a VA primary care provider (PCP) in 2012. Continuity was the proportion of primary care visits to the assigned VA provider of care. Clinics were categorized as low, average, or high-team functioning based on survey data. Our primary outcomes were the number of all-cause hospitalizations, ambulatory care sensitive (ACSC) hospitalizations, and emergency department (ED) visits in 2013.Principal Findings: A 10-percentage point increase in continuity with a VA PCP was associated with 4.5 fewer hospitalizations (p < .001), 3.2 fewer ACSC hospitalizations (p < .001), and 2.6 more ED visits (p = .07) per 1,000 patients. Team-based care was not significantly associated with any high-cost utilization category. Associations were heterogeneous across VA-reliant and nonreliant Veterans. Finally, the interaction results demonstrated that the quality of team-based care functioning could not compensate for poor continuity on hospitalizations, ACSC hospitalizations, or ED visits.Conclusions: In Veterans who were reliant on the VA for services, increasing continuity with a VA PCP and high-functioning team-based care clinics was associated with fewer ED visits and hospitalizations. Furthermore, leveraging combined data from VA and Medicare allowed to better measure continuity and assess high-cost utilization among Veterans who are and are not reliant on the VA for services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine the association between medical home enrollment and receipt of recommended care for Medicaid beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions (MCC).Data Sources/study Setting: Secondary claims data from fiscal years 2008-2010. The sample included nonelderly Medicaid beneficiaries with at least two of eight target conditions (asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, seizure disorder, major depressive disorder, and schizophrenia).Study Design: We used linear probability models with person- and year-level fixed effects to examine the association between patient-centered medical home (PCMH) enrollment and nine disease-specific quality-of-care metrics, controlling for selection bias and time-invariant differences between enrollees.Data Collection Methods: This study uses a dataset that links Medicaid claims with other administrative data sources.Principal Findings: Patient-centered medical home enrollment was associated with an increased likelihood of receiving eight recommended mental and physical health services, including A1C testing for persons with diabetes, lipid profiles for persons with diabetes and/or hyperlipidemia, and psychotherapy for persons with major depression and persons with schizophrenia. PCMH enrollment was associated with overuse of short-acting β-agonists among beneficiaries with asthma.Conclusions: The PCMH model can improve quality of care for patients with multiple chronic conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (lupus) is a chronic autoimmune disease that can impact any organ system and result in life-threatening complications. African-Americans are at increased risk for morbidity and mortality from lupus. Self-management programs have demonstrated significant improvements in health distress, self-reported global health, and activity limitation among people with lupus. Despite benefits, arthritis self-management education has reached only a limited number of people. Self-selection of program could improve such trends. The aim of the current study is to test a novel intervention to improve quality of life, decrease indicators of depression, and reduce perceived and biological indicators of stress in African-American lupus patients in South Carolina. Methods/design: In a three armed randomized, wait list controlled trial, we will evaluate the effectiveness of a patient-centered 'a-la-carte' approach that offers subjects a variety of modes of interaction from which they can choose as many or few as they wish, compared to a 'set menu' approach and usual care. This unique 'a-la-carte' self-management program will be offered to 50 African-American lupus patients participating in a longitudinal observational web-based SLE Database at the Medical University of South Carolina. Each individualized intervention plan will include 1-4 options, including a mail-delivered arthritis kit, addition and access to an online message board, participation in a support group, and enrollment in a local self-management program. A 'set menu' control group of 50 lupus patients will be offered a standardized chronic disease self-management program only, and a control group of 50 lupus patients will receive usual care. Outcomes will include changes in (a) health behaviors, (b) health status, (c) health care utilization, and (d) biological markers (urinary catecholamines). Discussion: Such a culturally sensitive educational intervention which includes self-selection of program components has the potential to improve disparate trends in quality of life, disease activity, depression, and stress among African-American lupus patients, as better outcomes have been documented when participants are able to choose/dictate the content and/or pace of the respective treatment/intervention program. Since there is currently no "gold standard" self-management program specifically for lupus, this project may have a considerable impact on future research and policy decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Healthcare organizations increasingly are focused on providing care which is patient-centered rather than disease-focused. Yet little is known about how best to transform the culture of care in these organizations. We sought to understand key organizational factors for implementing patient-centered care cultural transformation through an examination of efforts in the US Department of Veterans Affairs.Methods: We conducted multi-day site visits at four US Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers designated as leaders in providing patient-centered care. We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 108 employees (22 senior leaders, 42 middle managers, 37 front-line providers and 7 staff). Transcripts of audio recordings were analyzed using a priori codes based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We used constant comparison analysis to synthesize codes into meaningful domains.Results: Sites described actions taken to foster patient-centered care in seven domains: 1) leadership; 2) patient and family engagement; 3) staff engagement; 4) focus on innovations; 5) alignment of staff roles and priorities; 6) organizational structures and processes; 7) environment of care. Within each domain, we identified multi-faceted strategies for implementing change. These included efforts by all levels of organizational leaders who modeled patient-centered care in their interactions and fostered willingness to try novel approaches to care amongst staff. Alignment and integration of patient centered care within the organization, particularly surrounding roles, priorities and bureaucratic rules, remained major challenges.Conclusions: Transforming healthcare systems to focus on patient-centered care and better serve the "whole" patient is a complex endeavor. Efforts to transform healthcare culture require robust, multi-pronged efforts at all levels of the organization; leadership is only the beginning. Challenges remain for incorporating patient-centered approaches in the context of competing priorities and regulations. Through actions within each of the domains, organizations may begin to truly transform to patient-driven care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]