Search

Earlier identification of dementia is a policy goal in England, as well as in other developed countries, with implications for social workers and their practice with older people. This policy and practice review draws on English experiences and debates to explore awareness of dementia and the responses of social workers to concerns about dementia among older people. It points to the need for a change in culture of social work services, shifting responses from a focus solely on people with dementia whose disabilities are severe to new areas of practice with people who have only been recently informed of their diagnosis. Such a fresh approach to practice will require social workers to consider different needs along the course of the dementia syndrome. In England, practice with people with dementia will also change if the role of social work becomes more specialised. Developing social work's contribution to the support of people with dementia in its early stages will have to take into account the possible division of social work activity, as practitioners with specialist skills or as practitioners with more generic skills and guides to care services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Risk has become a ubiquitous presence in modern society. For individuals diagnosed with dementia this preoccupation with risk can affect their day-to-day life in many ways. Maintaining autonomy while balancing risks is a continual struggle not only for those living with the disease, but also their carers, family and health professionals. To understand how these different groups of individuals conceptualise the issue of risk for those living with dementia, 83 semi-structured interviews were conducted with people living with dementia, carers, older people without significant experience of dementia, and registered nurses, and staff from a community nursing organisation. These interviews were analysed using Thematic Analysis, which suggested that the risks identified by each group were grounded in their experiences and perspective on dementia. Furthermore, context and understanding of the individual living with dementia and their preferences was central to effectively managing risk in a balanced way, ensuring that 'acceptable risks' were taken to ensure an acceptable quality of life for all involved. These findings highlight that there is no single approach to risk which can be applied to all individuals; rather, a negotiation needs to take place that takes into account the individual's preferences alongside their available resources and means., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Avoidance of admission through provision of hospital care at home is a scheme whereby health care professionals provide active treatment in the patient's home for a condition that would otherwise require inpatient treatment in an acute care hospital. We sought to compare the effectiveness of this method of caring for patients with that type of in-hospital care., Methods: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and EconLit databases and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group register from the earliest date in each database until January 2008. We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated a service providing an alternative to admission to an acute care hospital. We excluded trials in which the program did not offer a substitute for inpatient care. We performed meta-analyses for trials for which the study populations had similar characteristics and for which common outcomes had been measured., Results: We included 10 randomized trials (with a total of 1327 patients) in our systematic review. Seven of these trials (with a total of 969 patients) were deemed eligible for meta-analysis of individual patient data, but we were able to obtain data for only 5 of these trials (with a total of 844 patients [87%]). There was no significant difference in mortality at 3 months for patients who received hospital care at home (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54-1.09, p = 0.15). However, at 6 months, mortality was significantly lower for these patients (adjusted HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.87, p = 0.005). Admissions to hospital were greater, but not significantly so, for patients receiving hospital care at home (adjusted HR 1.49, 95% CI 0.96-2.33, p = 0.08). Patients receiving hospital care at home reported greater satisfaction than those receiving inpatient care. These programs were less expensive than admission to an acute care hospital ward when the analysis was restricted to treatment actually received and when the costs of informal care were excluded., Interpretation: For selected patients, avoiding admission through provision of hospital care at home yielded similar outcomes to inpatient care, at a similar or lower cost.