Explore the vast range of titles available.

Health care systems that succeed in preventing long term care and hospital admissions of frail older people may substantially save on their public spending. The key might be found in high-quality care in the community. Quality Indicators (QIs) of a sufficient methodological level are a prerequisite to monitor, compare, and improve care quality. This systematic review identified existing QIs for community care for older people and assessed their methodological quality. Relevant studies were identified by searches in electronic reference databases and selected by two reviewers independently. Eligible publications described the development or application of QIs to assess the quality of community care for older people. Information about the QIs, the study sample, and specific setting was extracted. The methodological quality of the QI sets was assessed with the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument. A score of 50% or higher on a domain was considered to indicate high methodological quality. Searches resulted in 25 included articles, describing 17 QI sets with 567 QIs. Most indicators referred to care processes (80%) and measured clinical issues (63%), mainly about follow-up, monitoring, examinations and treatment. About two-third of the QIs focussed on specific disease groups. The methodological quality of the indicator sets varied considerably. The highest overall level was achieved on the domain 'Additional evidence, formulation and usage' (51%), followed by 'Scientific evidence' (39%) and 'Stakeholder involvement' (28%). A substantial number of QIs is available to assess the quality of community care for older people. However, generic QIs, measuring care outcomes and non-clinical aspects are relatively scarce and most QI sets do not meet standards of high methodological quality. This study can support policy makers and clinicians to navigate through a large number of QIs and select QIs for their purposes. PROSPERO Registration: 2014:CRD42014007199.

Identification of community-dwelling older adults at risk of unplanned hospitalizations is of importance to facilitate preventive interventions. Our objective was to review and appraise the methodological quality and predictive performance of prediction models for predicting unplanned hospitalizations in community-dwelling older adults We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL from August 2013 to January 2021. Additionally, we checked references of the identified articles for the inclusion of relevant publications and added studies from two previous reviews that fulfilled the eligibility criteria. We included prospective and retrospective studies with any follow-up period that recruited adults aged 65 and over and developed a prediction model predicting unplanned hospitalizations. We included models with at least one (internal or external) validation cohort. The models had to be intended to be used in a primary care setting. Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and undertook data extraction following recommendations of the CHARMS checklist, while quality assessment was performed using the PROBAST tool. A total of 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. Prediction horizon ranged from 4.5 months to 4 years. Most frequently included variables were specific medical diagnoses (n = 11), previous hospital admission (n = 11), age (n = 11), and sex or gender (n = 8). Predictive performance in terms of area under the curve ranged from 0.61 to 0.78. Models developed to predict potentially preventable hospitalizations tended to have better predictive performance than models predicting hospitalizations in general. Overall, risk of bias was high, predominantly in the analysis domain. Models developed to predict preventable hospitalizations tended to have better predictive performance than models to predict all-cause hospitalizations. There is however substantial room for improvement on the reporting and analysis of studies. We recommend better adherence to the TRIPOD guidelines.

In the nursing home sector, reusing routinely recorded data from electronic health records (EHRs) for knowledge development and quality improvement is still in its infancy. Trust in appropriate and responsible reuse is crucial for patients and nursing homes deciding whether to share EHR data for these purposes. A data governance framework determines who may access the data, under what conditions, and for what purposes. This can help obtain that trust. Although increasing attention is being paid to data governance in the health care sector, little guidance is available on development and implementation of a data governance framework in practice. This study aims to describe the development process of a governance framework for the \"Registry Learning from Data in Nursing Homes,\" a national registry for EHR data on care delivered by nursing home physicians (in Dutch: specialist ouderengeneeskunde) in Dutch nursing homes-to allow data reusage for research and quality improvement of care. Relevant stakeholders representing practices, policies, and research in the nursing home sector were identified. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 people from 14 stakeholder organizations. The main aim of the interviews was to explore stakeholders' perspectives regarding the Registry's aim, data access criteria, and governing bodies' tasks and composition. Interview topics and analyses were guided by 8 principles regarding governance for reusing health data, as described in the literature. Interview results, together with legal advice and consensus discussions by the Registry's consortium partners, were used to shape the rules, regulations, and governing bodies of the governance framework. Stakeholders valued the involvement of nursing home residents and their representatives, nursing home physicians, nursing homes' boards of directors, and scientists and saw this as a prerequisite for a trustworthy data governance framework. For the Registry, involvement of these groups can be achieved through a procedure in which residents can provide their consent or objection to the reuse of the data, transparency about the decisions made, and providing them a position in a governing body. In addition, a data request approval procedure based on predefined assessment criteria indicates that data reuse by third parties aligns with the aims of the Registry, benefits the nursing home sector, and protects the privacy of data subjects. The stakeholders' views, expertise, and knowledge of other frameworks and relevant legislation serve to inform the application of governance principles to the contexts of both the nursing home sector and the Netherlands. Many different stakeholders were involved in the development of the Registry Learning from Data in Nursing Homes' governance framework and will continue to be involved. Engagement of the full range of stakeholders in an early stage of governance framework development is important to generate trust in appropriate and responsible data reuse.

Background Previous research suggests that family caregivers contemplate suicide at a higher rate than the general population. Much of this research has been disease specific and in relatively small samples. This study aimed to compare suicidal thoughts between non-caregivers and informal caregivers of people with a variety of conditions, in a large representative sample, and to identify significant risk factors. Methods The general population study NEMESIS-2 (N at baseline = 6646) included 1582 adult caregivers at the second wave (2010–2012) who also participated at the third wave (2013–2015). Suicidal thoughts were assessed over 4 years, with the Suicidality Module of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0. The presence of suicidal thoughts was estimated and risk factors for suicidal thoughts were assessed with logistic regression analyses adjusted for age and gender. Results Thirty-six informal caregivers (2.9%) reported suicidal thoughts during the 4 year study period. The difference between caregivers and non-caregivers (3.0%) was not significant. Among caregivers, significant risk factors for suicidal thoughts included being unemployed, living without a partner, having lower levels of social support, having a chronic physical disorder, a mood disorder or an anxiety disorder, and having impaired social, physical and emotional functioning. These risk factors were also found in non-caregivers. No caregiving-related characteristics were associated with suicidal thoughts. Conclusion There was no elevated rate of suicidal thoughts in caregivers and risk factors for suicidal thoughts in caregivers were consistent with risk factors in non-caregivers. No association between caregiving characteristics and suicidal thoughts was found. Caregivers with limited resources and in poorer health might still benefit from prevention and intervention efforts.

Background Audit and group feedback (A&F) is an instrument used to encourage healthcare professionals to improve the quality of care. Clinical practice was audited against a set of criteria and fed back to a group by a facilitator. The aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of how physician group feedback sessions in nursing homes were conducted and to what extent they resulted in action planning. Methods Fifteen group feedback sessions of the antibiotic A&F program within a nursing home network were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed via the Framework Method for thematic analysis. The coding was performed using the existing Calgary A&F Framework and Cooke’s conceptual model of physician behaviors, and open inductive codes were added. Results Elements of the conceptual model and the Calgary A&F Framework occurred within all group feedback sessions. The relationships within the group and with the facilitators were important elements when moving a group from interpreting the results to formulating action plans. Physician groups responded positively to the audit data, particularly if they were among the best performing. The data were met with doubt by physicians who did not recognize their own practice. When exploring potential reasons for lower guideline adherence, groups often considered data quality or external factors such as the choice of non-adherent treatment by locum staff. The degree of reflection on personal factors as explanations for low adherence and the extent to which groups identified learning and improvement opportunities varied: some groups were able to formulate action plans to address data problems and knowledge gaps, whereas others scheduled a follow-up meeting to develop action plans for treatment or prescribing practice changes. Conclusions The facilitator was crucial in supporting the group in interpreting the results, steering the conversation towards sharing change cues, and helping the physician group in developing action plans. The degree of reflection and action planning varied by group. By implementing the lessons learned from this study, group feedback sessions can be refined, supporting participants in action planning.

Unplanned hospital admissions are distressing for older persons and are associated with a high risk of adverse outcomes and a burden on health systems. Understanding the risk and protective factors for unplanned admissions can help to design new preventive interventions in primary care. To explore primary healthcare professionals' experiences on factors affecting unplanned hospital admissions in community-dwelling older adults and identify opportunities for preventive interventions. We performed a focus group study with a purposive sample of Dutch primary healthcare professionals. Four focus groups were conducted with a total of 22 primary healthcare professionals comprising 10 general practitioners (GPs) and 12 other primary healthcare professionals. All focus groups were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed. Factors affecting unplanned admissions were grouped into characteristics of the patient, the healthcare professional, and healthcare organisation. Patient-related risk factors included the presence of chronic conditions, health-seeking behaviour, the presence and capacity of an informal caregiver, and cultural expectations of healthcare. Continuity of care, advance care planning, and professional experience as a GP were identified as mitigating professional-related factors for unplanned admissions. Organisational factors that potentially contributed to unplanned admissions were poor informational continuity, suboptimal care coordination, and lack of alternatives to hospitalisation. Unplanned hospital admissions in older adults were perceived to be influenced by patient, healthcare professional, and healthcare organisation-related factors. Strategies such as ensuring broad access to patients' clinical information and treatment wishes, improving personal continuity of care, and structural provision of advance care may contribute to reduce unplanned admissions.

Background Dementia is a progressive disease that decreases quality of life of persons with dementia and is associated with high societal costs. The burden of caring for persons with dementia also decreases the quality of life of family caregivers. The objective of this study was to assess the societal cost-effectiveness of Namaste Care Family program in comparison with usual care in nursing home residents with advanced dementia. Methods Nursing homes were randomized to either Namaste Care Family program or usual care. Outcome measures of the cluster-randomized trial in 231 residents included Quality of Life in Late-Stage Dementia (QUALID) and the Gain in Alzheimer Care Instrument (GAIN) for family caregivers over 12 months of follow-up. Health states were measured using the EQ-5D-3L questionnaire which were translated into utilities. QALYs were calculated by multiplying the amount of time a participant spent in a specific health state with the utility score associated with that health state. Healthcare utilization costs were estimated using standard unit costs, while intervention costs were estimated using a bottom-up approach. Missing cost and effect data were imputed using multiple imputation. Bootstrapped multilevel models were used after multiple imputation. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were estimated. Results The Namaste Care Family program was more effective than usual care in terms of QUALID (− 0.062, 95%CI: − 0.40 to 0.28), QALY (0.0017, 95%CI: − 0.059 to 0.063) and GAIN (0.075, 95%CI: − 0.20 to 0.35). Total societal costs were lower for the Namaste Care Family program as compared to usual care (− 552 €, 95%CI: − 2920 to 1903). However, these differences were not statistically significant. The probability of cost-effectiveness at a ceiling ratio of 0 €/unit of effect extra was 0.70 for the QUALID, QALY and GAIN. Conclusions The Namaste Care Family program is dominant over usual care and, thus, cost-effective, although statistical uncertainty was considerable. Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register ( http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/index.asp , identifier: NL5570, date of registration: 2016/03/23).

The objective of this article was to compare the costs and cost-effectiveness of the two most prominent types of case management in the Netherlands (intensive case management and linkage models) against no access to case management (control group) for people with already diagnosed dementia and their informal caregivers. The economic evaluation was conducted from a societal perspective embedded within a two year prospective, observational, controlled, cohort study with 521 informal caregivers and community-dwelling persons with dementia. Case management provided within one care organization (intensive case management model, ICMM), case management where care was provided by different care organizations within one region (Linkage model, LM), and a group with no access to case management (control) were compared. The economic evaluation related incremental costs to incremental effects regarding neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI), psychological health of the informal caregiver (GHQ-12), and quality adjusted life years (QALY) of the person with dementia and informal caregiver. Inverse-propensity-score-weighted models showed no significant differences in clinical or total cost outcomes between the three groups. Informal care costs were significantly lower in the ICMM group compared to both other groups. Day center costs were significantly lower in the ICMM group compared to the control group. For all outcomes, the probability that the ICMM was cost-effective in comparison with LM and the control group was larger than 0.97 at a threshold ratio of 0 €/incremental unit of effect. This study provides preliminary evidence that the ICMM is cost-effective compared to the control group and the LM. However, the findings should be interpreted with caution since this study was not a randomized controlled trial.

ObjectivesThere are substantial barriers to initiate advance care planning (ACP) for persons with chronic-progressive disease in primary care settings. Some challenges may be disease-specific, such as communicating in case of cognitive impairment. This study assessed and compared the initiation of ACP in primary care with persons with dementia, Parkinson’s disease, cancer, organ failure and stroke.DesignLongitudinal study linking data from a database of Dutch general practices’ electronic health records with national administrative databases managed by Statistics Netherlands.Setting and participantsData from general practice records of 199 034 community-dwelling persons with chronic-progressive disease diagnosed between 2008 and 2016.Outcome measureIncidence rate ratio (IRR) of recorded ACP planning conversations per 1000 person-years in persons with a diagnosis of dementia, Parkinson’s disease, organ failure, cancer or stroke, compared with persons without the particular diagnosis. Poisson regression and competing risk analysis were performed, adjusted for age, gender, migration background, living situation, frailty index and income, also for disease subsamples.ResultsIn adjusted analyses, the rate of first ACP conversation for persons with organ failure was the lowest (IRR 0.70 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.73)). Persons with cancer had the highest rate (IRR 1.75 (95% CI 1.68 to 1.83)). Within the subsample of persons with organ failure, the subsample of persons with dementia and the subsample of stroke, a comorbid diagnosis of cancer increased the probability of ACP. Further, for those with organ failure or cancer, comorbid dementia decreased the probability of ACP.ConclusionsConsidering the complexity of initiating ACP for persons with organ failure or dementia, general practitioners should prioritise offering it to them and their family caregivers. Policy initiatives should stimulate the implementation of ACP for people with chronic-progressive disease.

Family caregivers of dementia patients are at increased risk of developing depression or anxiety. A multi-component program designed to mobilize support of family networks demonstrated effectiveness in decreasing depressive symptoms in caregivers. However, the impact of an intervention consisting solely of family meetings on depression and anxiety has not yet been evaluated. This study examines the preventive effects of family meetings for primary caregivers of community-dwelling dementia patients. A randomized multicenter trial was conducted among 192 primary caregivers of community dwelling dementia patients. Caregivers did not meet the diagnostic criteria for depressive or anxiety disorder at baseline. Participants were randomized to the family meetings intervention (n = 96) or usual care (n = 96) condition. The intervention consisted of two individual sessions and four family meetings which occurred once every 2 to 3 months for a year. Outcome measures after 12 months were the incidence of a clinical depressive or anxiety disorder and change in depressive and anxiety symptoms (primary outcomes), caregiver burden and quality of life (secondary outcomes). Intention-to-treat as well as per protocol analyses were performed. A substantial number of caregivers (72/192) developed a depressive or anxiety disorder within 12 months. The intervention was not superior to usual care either in reducing the risk of disorder onset (adjusted IRR 0.98; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.38) or in reducing depressive (randomization-by-time interaction coefficient = -1.40; 95% CI -3.91 to 1.10) or anxiety symptoms (randomization-by-time interaction coefficient = -0.55; 95% CI -1.59 to 0.49). The intervention did not reduce caregiver burden or their health related quality of life. This study did not demonstrate preventive effects of family meetings on the mental health of family caregivers. Further research should determine whether this intervention might be more beneficial if provided in a more concentrated dose, when applied for therapeutic purposes or targeted towards subgroups of caregivers. Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN90163486.