Search

Background In the UK, a large proportion of older adults live in rural/remote locations. More people are dying at home and require care from their families. Little is known about the experiences of family carers of older people in rural/remote areas in the last year of life. Aim To explore the experiences of current and bereaved family carers who support/ed an older person in a rural area in the UK towards the end-of-life. Design Qualitative methodology using semi-structured interviews and reflexive thematic analysis methods. Method Interviews were conducted with family carers of rural/remote-dwelling older people in the last year of life. Participants were recruited through national support services, third sector organisations and social media. Results Interviews were conducted with 20 family carers. Most were female (n  = 17) and aged 52–80 years. Family carers experienced difficulties in accessing health and social care in rural/remote areas due to workforce and skills shortages within their regions. The wider community helped with practical tasks and made carers feel less alone. Community-based services, such as day care, helped to provide respite for carers and promoted meaningful activity and social inclusion for older people. Although internet access was problematic, family carers gained support remotely via social media and telehealth services. Conclusion Family carers of older people in the last year of life in rural/remote areas value support from the wider community. Further work is required to understand how Public Health approaches to palliative care and workforce distribution can support rural/remote carers and older people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: As populations age globally, there is an increasing prevalence of dementia, with an estimated 153 million living with dementia by 2050. Up to 70% of people with dementia experience dementia‐related psychosis (D‐RP). Antipsychotic medications are associated with many adverse effects in older people. This review aims to evaluate the evidence of non‐pharmacological interventions in managing D‐RP. Method: The search of Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane included randomised controlled trials that evaluated non‐pharmacological interventions. Data extraction and assessment of quality were assessed independently by two researchers. Heterogenous interventions were pooled using meta‐analysis. Results: A total of 18 articles (n = 2040 participants) were included and categorised into: sensory‐, activity‐, cognitive‐ and multi‐component‐orientated. Meta‐analyses showed no significant impact in reducing hallucinations or delusions but person‐centred care, cognitive rehabilitation, music therapy, and robot pets showed promise in single studies. Conclusions and Implications: Future interventions should be developed and evaluated with a specific focus on D‐RP as this was not the aim for many of the included articles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To explore the experiences, acceptability and utility of a decision aid for family carers of people with dementia towards the end of life. Methods: We conducted semi‐structured interviews with a sample of family carers enroled into a 6‐month feasibility study in England, sampling to gain a range of experiences and views, based on relationship to person they cared for (e.g., spouse, adult child), age, gender, and self‐reported use of the decision aid during the feasibility study. Interviews were conducted in March 2021–July 2021 and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. We used COREQ checklist to report our methods and results. Results: Family carers found the decision aid acceptable, describing it as comprehensive, accessible with relevant information and its presentation enabled good engagement. Experiences of the decision aid covered four main themes which demonstrated the perceived acceptability and utility: 1. A source of support and reassurance; 2. Empowering conversations and confidence; 3. Including the person living with dementia; and 4. Breaking down complexity. Conclusions: An aid focussing on decisions about dementia end of life care supported family carers break down complex and emotive decisions, not only with making decisions in the moment but also in future planning. Patient or Public Contribution: Our three Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) members (all former family carers) were crucial throughout the wider study. PPI supported development of the topic guides, supported trialling the topic guide and interview procedures and finally supported the development of themes as part of the analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The number of people living with diabetes is rising worldwide and a higher prevalence of diabetes has been linked to those experiencing socioeconomic deprivation. Self‐management strategies are vital and known to reduce the risks of long‐term complications amongst people living with diabetes. Lack of knowledge about self‐care activity required to manage diabetes is a key barrier to successful self‐management. Self‐management interventions can be less effective in socioeconomically deprived populations which can increase the risk of exacerbating health inequalities. The purpose of this review is to identify and synthesise qualitative evidence on the barriers and facilitators of self‐management of diabetes amongst people who are socioeconomically disadvantaged. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO and CINAHL Plus were searched for qualitative studies concerning self‐management of multiple long‐term conditions amongst socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. Relevant papers which focused on diabetes were identified. Data were coded and thematically synthesised using NVivo. Findings: From the search results, 79 qualitative studies were identified after full‐text screening and 26 studies were included in the final thematic analysis. Two overarching analytical themes were identified alongside a set of subthemes: (1) Socioeconomic barriers to diabetes self‐management; healthcare costs, financial costs of healthy eating, cultural influences, living in areas of deprivation, competing priorities and time constraints, health literacy, (2) facilitators of diabetes self‐management; lifestyle and having goals, support from healthcare providers, informal support. Discussion: Self‐management of diabetes is challenging for people experiencing socioeconomic deprivation due to barriers associated with living in areas of deprivation and financial barriers surrounding healthcare, medication and healthy food. Support from healthcare providers can facilitate self‐management, and it is important that people with diabetes have access to interventions that are designed to be inclusive from a cultural perspective as well as affordable. Patient or Public Contribution: A patient advisory group contributed to the research questions and interpretation of the qualitative findings by reflecting on the themes developed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Advance care planning in dementia includes supporting the person and their family to consider important goals of care. International research reports the importance of psycho-social-spiritual aspects towards end of life. Aim: To develop a multidimensional international palliative care goals model in dementia for use in practice. Design: International Delphi study integrating consensus and evidence from a meta-qualitative study. The Delphi panel rated statements about the model on a 5-point agreement scale. The criteria for consensus were pre-specified. Setting/participants: Seventeen researchers from eight countries developed an initial model, and 169 candidate panellists were invited to the international online Delphi study. Results: Panellists (107; response 63.3%) resided in 33 countries. The model comprised four main care goals: (1) Comfort ensured; (2) Control over function maintained; (3) Identity protected and personhood respected and (4) Coping with grief and loss−person and caregiver supported. The model reflects how needs and care goals change over time with the progression of dementia, concluding with bereavement support. The first version of the model achieved a consensus after which it was slightly refined based on feedback. We did not achieve a consensus on adding a goal of life prolongation, and on use of the model by people with dementia and family themselves. Conclusion: A new palliative care goals model for people with dementia and their families includes relationship aspects for use by professionals and achieved a consensus among a panel with diverse cultural background. The position of life prolongation in relation to palliative care goals needs further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]