Background Inappropriate drug use (IDU) is an important risk factor for adverse outcomes in older persons. We aimed to investigate IDU and the risk of hospitalizations and mortality in older persons and in persons with dementia and to estimate the costs of IDU-related hospitalizations. Methods We analyzed 4108 individuals aged ≥60 years from the Swedish National Study on Aging and Care (SNAC) data from Kungsholmen and Nordanstig (2001–2004). IDU was assessed by indicators developed by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Hospitalizations and mortality data were collected from Swedish registers. Regression models were used to investigate associations between IDU, hospitalizations, and mortality in the whole population and in the subpopulation of persons with dementia (n = 319), after adjustment for sociodemographics, physical functioning, and co-morbidity. Costs for hospitalizations were derived from the Nord-Diagnose Related Group cost database. Results IDU was associated with a higher risk of hospitalization [adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.46; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.18–1.81] and mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 1.15; 95 % CI 1.01–1.31] within 1 year in the whole study population and with hospitalization (adjusted OR = 1.88; 95 % CI 1.03–3.43) in the subpopulation of persons with dementia, after adjustment for confounding factors. There was also a tendency for higher costs for hospitalizations with IDU than without IDU, although this was not statistically significant. Conclusions Our findings suggest that IDU is associated with an increased risk of hospitalization in older persons and in persons with dementia. IDU is also associated with mortality among older persons. These findings highlight the need for cautious prescribing of long-acting benzodiazepines, anticholinergic drugs, concurrent use of three or more psychotropic drugs and drug combinations that may lead to serious drug–drug interactions to older patients. Further studies are needed to investigate the association between IDU and costs for hospitalizations.

Background: The societal costs of Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) are enormous and pose a great challenge for the health and social care in any society. It is of vital importance to develop and identify cost effective treatment. The aim of the study was to present a hypothetical economic model of Disease Modifying Treatment (DMT) in AD. Methods: A 20 year Markov cohort model of DMT was constructed, based on Swedish care conditions. States and progression were defined according to the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). Epidemiological studies of incidence of dementia, prevalence and costs of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and AD as well as conversion studies of MCI and demographic statistics were used as inputs in the model. Results: Total costs were 113,797 million SEK for patients treated with DMT vs 88,562 million SEK for untreated patients. The corresponding gained QALYs were 529,945 and 450,307 respectively, giving an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of 293,002 SEK/QALY in the base option. Survival in the model was 8.72 years with DMT and 7.77 years for untreated. With an assumed Willingness to pay (WTP) of 600,000 SEK (about 86,200 US$ and 62,000 €) per gained QALY, the model indicated cost effectiveness with DMT. The sensitivity analysis implied no cost savings with DMT, but most options indicated cost effectiveness vs. the chosen WTP. Conclusion: The main reasons for the higher costs with DMT were the costs of DMT itself and the prolonged survival with DMT. Even if costs increase with DMT, the model indicates cost effectiveness.

Background: In this study, we sought to estimate the societal cost of illness in dementia in Sweden in 2012 using different costing approaches to highlight methodological issues. Methods: We conducted a prevalence-based cost-of-illness study with a societal perspective. Results: The societal costs of dementia in Sweden in 2012 were SEK 62.9 billion (approximately €7.2 billion, approximately US$9.0 billion) or SEK 398,000 per person with dementia (approximately €45,000, approximately US$57,000). By far the most important cost item is the cost of institutional care: about 60% of the costs. In the sensitivity analysis, different quantification and costing approaches for informal care resulted in a great variation in the total societal cost, ranging from SEK 60 billion (€6.8 billion, US$8.6 billion) to SEK 124 billion (€14.1 billion, US$17.8 billion). Conclusions: The societal costs of dementia are very high. The cost per person with dementia has decreased somewhat, mainly because of de-institutionalisation. The majority of the costs occur in the social care sector, but the costing of informal care is crucial for the cost estimates.

Purpose: Informal care constitutes an important part of the total care for people with dementia. Therefore, the impact of the syndrome on their caregivers as well as that of health and social care services for people with dementia should be considered. This study investigated the convergent and clinical validity of the CarerQol instrument, which measures and values the impact of providing informal care, in a multi-country sample of caregivers for people with dementia. Methods: Cross-sectional data from a sample of 451 respondents in eight European countries, collected by the Actifcare project, were evaluated. Convergent validity was analysed with Spearman’s correlation coefficients and multivariate correlations between the CarerQol-7D utility score and dimension scores, and other similar quality of life measures such as CarerQol-VAS, ICECAP-O, and EQ-5D. Clinical validity was evaluated by bivariate and multivariate analyses of the degree to which the CarerQol instrument can differentiate between characteristics of caregivers, care receivers and caregiving situation. Country dummies were added to test CarerQol score differences between countries. Results: The mean CarerQol utility score was 77.6 and varied across countries from 74.3 (Italy) to 82.3 (Norway). The scores showed moderate to strong positive correlations with the CarerQol-VAS, ICECAP-O, and EQ-5D health problems score of the caregiver. Multivariate regression analysis showed that various characteristics of the caregiver, care receiver and caregiving situation were associated with caregiver outcomes, but there was no evidence of a country-level effect. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the convergent and clinical validity of the CarerQol instrument to evaluate the impact of providing informal care for people with dementia.

Chronic pain affects nursing home residents’ daily life. Pain assessment is central to adequate pain management. The overall aim was to investigate effects of a pain management intervention on nursing homes residents and to describe staffs’ experiences of the intervention. A cluster-randomized trial and a mixed-methods approach. Randomized nursing home assignment to intervention or comparison group. The intervention group after theoretical and practical training sessions, performed systematic pain assessments using predominately observational scales with external and internal facilitators supporting the implementation. No measures were taken in the comparison group; pain management continued as before, but after the study corresponding training was provided. Resident data were collected baseline and at two follow-ups using validated scales and record reviews. Nurse group interviews were carried out twice. Primary outcome measures were wellbeing and proxy-measured pain. Secondary outcome measures were ADL-dependency and pain documentation. Using both non-parametric statistics on residential level and generalized estimating equation (GEE) models to take clustering effects into account, the results revealed non-significant interaction effects for the primary outcome measures, while for ADL-dependency using Katz-ADL there was a significant interaction effect. Comparison group (n = 66 residents) Katz-ADL values showed increased dependency over time, while the intervention group demonstrated no significant change over time (n = 98). In the intervention group, 13/44 residents showed decreased pain scores over the period, 14/44 had no pain score changes ≥ 30% in either direction measured with Doloplus-2. Furthermore, 17/44 residents showed increased pain scores ≥ 30% over time, indicating pain/risk for pain; 8 identified at the first assessment and 9 were new, i.e. developed pain over time. No significant changes in the use of drugs was found in any of the groups. Nursing pain related documentation was sparse. In general, nurses from the outset were positive regarding pain assessments. Persisting positive attitudes seemed strengthened by continued assessment experiences and perceptions of improved pain management. The implementation of a systematic work approach to pain issues in nursing homes indicates that an increased awareness, collaboration across and shared understanding among the team members of the pain assessment results can improve pain management and lead to decreased physical deterioration or the maintenance of physical and functional abilities among NH residents. However, pain (proxy-measured) and wellbeing level did not reveal any interaction effects between the groups over time. The study was registered in ISRCTN71142240 in September 2012, retrospectively registered.

Background: A critical challenge facing elderly care systems throughout the world is to meet the complex care needs of a growing population of older persons. Although person-centred care has been advocated as the “gold standard” and a key component of high-quality care, the significance of care utilisation in person-centred units as well as the impact of person-centred care on resident quality of life and staff job strain in nursing home care has yet to be explored.The aim of this study was to explore person-centred care and its association to resource use, resident quality of life, and staff job strain.Design: A cross-sectional national survey.Methods: Data on 4831 residents and 3605 staff were collected by staff working in nursing homes in 35 randomly selected Swedish municipalities in 2014. Descriptive statistics and regression modelling were used to explore associations between person-centred care and resource use, resident quality of life, and staff job strain.Results: No association was found between person-centred care and resource use. Person-centred care was positively associated with resident quality of life and was negatively associated with staff perception of job strain.Conclusion: Person-centred care does not increase resource utilisation in nursing homes, but beneficially impacts resident quality of life and alleviates the care burden in terms job strain among staff.