In dementia care, a large number of treatment decisions are made by family carers on behalf of their family member who lacks decisional capacity; advance care planning can support such carers in the decision-making of care goals. However, given the relative importance of advance care planning in dementia care, the prevalence of advance care planning in dementia care is poor. To evaluate the effectiveness of advance care planning with family carers in dementia care homes. Paired cluster randomized controlled trial. The intervention comprised a trained facilitator, family education, family meetings, documentation of advance care planning decisions and intervention orientation for general practitioners and nursing home staff. A total of 24 nursing homes with a dementia nursing category located in Northern Ireland, United Kingdom. Family carers of nursing home residents classified as having dementia and judged as not having decisional capacity to participate in advance care planning discussions. The primary outcome was family carer uncertainty in decision-making about the care of the resident (Decisional Conflict Scale). There was evidence of a reduction in total Decisional Conflict Scale score in the intervention group compared with the usual care group (−10.5, 95% confidence interval: −16.4 to −4.7; p < 0.001). Advance care planning was effective in reducing family carer uncertainty in decision-making concerning the care of their family member and improving perceptions of quality of care in nursing homes. Given the global significance of dementia, the implications for clinicians and policy makers include them recognizing the importance of family carer education and improving communication between family carers and formal care providers.

This scoping review comprehensively describes evidence of using peer support to assist informal carers of individuals with dementia (any type). A systematic search of 11 databases (CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, Web of Science, Scopus, Science Direct, ProQuest, TRIP and PubMed) was conducted for research published between 2007–2017 focussing on informal dementia carers, and research designs with interventions incorporating or consisting exclusively of peer support. Authors worked independently to screen retrieved articles, review applicability and extract data. Thirty‐six research papers (representing 28 original studies) were identified, from these, two modes of delivery were demonstrated: 12 studies provided the intervention online, and the remainder face‐to‐face. The review indicated that peer support is of potential benefit to carers if it is delivered via either mode. It is not clear what components may or may not be effective as results provided a mixed landscape of differing intervention effectiveness due to the wide variation in outcome measurements. Trial design using a multi‐component intervention was the predominant choice, with the most common components being Information Sharing and Non‐Healthcare Professional Support for both delivery modes. The burden/anxiety/depression compendium and health and well‐being were the most frequently measured outcomes; perceived level of support was one of the least. The peer support interventions identified included various components, demonstrating no true best practice model. Nonetheless, they can be offered successfully online or face‐to‐face. This provides a unique opportunity to develop and supply tailored peer support interventions for informal dementia carers to ensure their specific needs are met. Further work is required to construct and evaluate the effectiveness of targeted peer‐led support whether online or face‐to‐face to meet the individual needs of dementia carers.

Advance care planning (ACP) facilitates communication and understanding of preferences, nevertheless the use of ACPs in primary care is low. The uncertain course of dementia and the inability to communicate with the patient living with dementia are significant challenges for GPs to initiate discussions on goals of care. A cross-sectional survey, using a purposive, cluster sample of GPs across Northern Ireland with registered dementia patients was used. GPs at selected practices received the survey instrument and up to four mail contacts was implemented. One hundred and thirty-three GPs (40.6%) participated in the survey, representing 60.9% of surveyed practices. While most respondents regarded dementia as a terminal disease (96.2%) only 37.6% felt that palliative care applied equally from the time of diagnosis to severe dementia. While most respondents thought that early discussions would facilitate decision-making during advanced dementia (61%), respondents were divided on whether ACP should be initiated at the time of diagnoses. While most respondents felt that GPs should take the initiative to introduce and encourage ACP, most survey participants acknowledged the need for improved knowledge to involve families in caring for patients with dementia at the end of life and that a standard format for ACP documentation was needed. Optimal timing of ACP discussions should be determined by the readiness of the patient and family carer to face end of life. ACP discussions can be enhanced by educational strategies directed towards the patient and family carer that enable shared decision-making with their GP when considering options in future care.

Introduction: Although it is possible to live well with dementia and many individuals with dementia lead active lives with the help of family, friends, and communities, the general impression of dementia is frequently negative. Dementia is a global health issue. Despite this, little research has been done on the effects of innovative dementia education strategies among undergraduate nursing students. The aim of this study was therefore to assess if this serious digital game, originally intended for the public, could increase knowledge about dementia in first-year nursing students. Methods: The intervention was a digital serious game called “The Dementia Game”, which was available to students throughout February 2021, to a convenience sample of first-year undergraduate nursing students (n = 560) completing a BSc Honours Nursing Degree programme in one university in Northern Ireland. The game was evaluated using a pretest-posttest design. The questionnaire comprised of a 30- item true- false Alzheimer’s Disease Knowledge Scale (ADKS), which covers risk factors, assessment and diagnosis, symptoms, course, life impact, caregiving and treatment and management. Data were analysed using paired t-tests and descriptive statistics. Results: Overall dementia knowledge increased significantly after playing the game. Pre-test to post-test increases were observed across a range of seven categories of dementia knowledge (life impact, risk factors, symptoms, treatment, assessment, caregiving and trajectory), with particularly large increases in knowledge of trajectory and risk factors, as shown using paired t-tests. All pre-test to post-test comparisons were significant at the p < 0.001 level. Conclusions: A short serious digital game on dementia improved first-year student’s knowledge about dementia. Undergraduate students also expressed that this approach to dementia education was effective in improving their knowledge about the disease.

Background: Frailty is a geriatric syndrome in which physiological systems have decreased reserve and resistance against stressors. Frailty is associated with polypharmacy, inappropriate prescribing and unfavourable clinical outcomes. Aim: To identify and evaluate randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions designed to optimise the medications of frail older patients, aged 65 years and over, in secondary or acute care settings. Method: Literature searches were conducted across seven electronic databases and three trial registries from the date of inception to October 2021. All types of interventional studies were included. Study selection, data extraction, risk of bias and quality assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers. Results: Three RCTs were eligible for inclusion; two employed deprescribing as the intervention, and one used comprehensive geriatric assessment. All reported significant improvements in prescribing appropriateness. One study investigated the effect of the intervention on clinical outcomes including hospital presentations, falls, fracture, quality of life and mortality, and reported no significant differences in these outcomes, but did report a significant reduction in monthly medication cost. Two of the included studies were assessed as having ‘some concerns’ of bias, and one was judged to be at ‘high risk’ of bias. Conclusion: This systematic review demonstrates that medicines optimisation interventions may improve medication appropriateness in frail older inpatients. However, it highlights the paucity of high-quality evidence that examines the impact of medicines optimisation on quality of prescribing and clinical outcomes for frail older inpatients. High-quality studies are needed to address this gap.