Introduction: In the absence of a cure, dementia is often managed by minimizing risk factors contributing to quality of life (QOL). Attitudes to dementia in older adults may differ from those in relatively younger adults. The aim was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to determine how QOL was assessed in adults, 65 years and older with dementia, and identify factors that influence the reported scores. Methods: A systematic review of full-text articles addressing QOL in older adults with dementia, published in English from January 1995 to September 2020, was conducted using PubMed and PsycINFO. We included studies that assessed QOL and involved participants 65 years and older. Studies were evaluated for inclusion by 2 independent pairs of reviewers. We assessed the quality of the studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute’s Critical Appraisal Checklist. Study characteristics and findings were summarized. Analysis was by narrative synthesis. We identified social and clinical factors influencing QOL scores. Results: Of the 1,010 articles identified, 19 met the inclusion criteria. These 19 studies involved 6,279 persons with dementia, with sample sizes from 32 to 1,366. Mean age of participants ranged from 77.1 to 86.6 years. Five measurement tools were identified; Quality of Life in Alzheimer Disease (QOL-AD), Alzheimer Disease-Related Quality of Life (ADRQL), Quality of Life in Late-Stage Dementia (QUALID), QUALIDEM (a dementia-specific QOL tool), and DEMQOL (health-related QOL for people with dementia). Self-ratings of QOL were higher than proxy ratings. Factors commonly influencing self-ratings of QOL included depression, functional impairment, and polypharmacy. Common factors that influenced proxy ratings included functional impairment, presence of neuropsychiatric symptoms, cognitive impairment, and caregiver burden. Conclusion: In evaluating QOL in dementia, self- and proxy reports may complement each other to ensure that all perspectives are addressed.

Background: About 50% of all hospitalized fragility fracture cases in older Americans are hip fractures. Approximately 3/4 of fracture-related costs in the USA are attributable to hip fractures, and these are mostly covered by Medicare. Hip fracture patients with dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease, have worse health outcomes including longer hospital length of stay (LOS) and charges. LOS and hospital charges for dementia patients are usually higher than for those without dementia. Research describing LOS and acute care charges for hip fractures has mostly focused on these outcomes in trauma patients without a known pre-admission diagnosis of osteoporosis (OP). Lack of documented diagnosis put patients at risk of not having an appropriate treatment plan for OP. Whether having a diagnosis of OP would have an effect on hospital outcomes in dementia patients has not been explored. We aim to investigate whether having a diagnosis of OP, dementia, or both has an effect on LOS and hospital charges. In addition, we also report prevalence of common comorbidities in the study population and their effects on hospital outcomes. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of claims data (2012–2013) for 2175 Medicare beneficiaries (≥65 years) in the USA. Results: Compared to those without OP or dementia, patients with demenia only had a shorter LOS (by 5%; P = .04). Median LOS was 6 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 5–7), and the median hospital charges were $45,100 (IQR: 31,500 − 65,600). In general, White patients had a shorter LOS (by 7%), and those with CHF and ischemic heart disease (IHD) had longer LOS (by 7 and 4%, respectively). Hospital charges were 6% lower for women, and 16% lower for White patients. Conclusion: This is the first study evaluating LOS in dementia in the context of hip fracture which also disagrees with previous reporting about longer LOS in dementia patients. Patients with CHF and IHD remains at high risk for longer LOS regardless of their diagnosis of dementia or OP.

Objectives: To evaluate the 30‐day hospital readmission rate, reasons, and risk factors for patients with cancer who were discharged to home setting after acute inpatient rehabilitation.Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a secondary retrospective analysis of participants in a completed prospective survey study that assessed the continuity of care and functional safety concerns upon discharge and 30 days after discharge in adults. Patients were enrolled from September 5, 2018, to February 7, 2020, at a large academic quaternary cancer center with National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Center designation.Main Outcomes and Measures: Thirty‐day hospital readmission rate, descriptive summary of reasons for readmissions, and statistical analyses of risk factors related to readmission.Results: Fifty‐five (21%) of the 257 patients were readmitted to hospital within 30 days of discharge from acute inpatient rehabilitation. The reasons for readmissions were infection (20, 7.8%), neoplasm (9, 3.5%), neurological (7, 2.7%), gastrointestinal disorder (6, 2.3%), renal failure (3, 1.1%), acute coronary syndrome (3, 1.1%), heart failure (1, 0.4%), fracture (1, 0.4%), hematuria (1, 0.4%), wound (1, 0.4%), nephrolithiasis (1, 0.4%), hypervolemia (1, 0.4%), and pain (1, 0.4%). Multivariate logistic regression modeling indicated that having a lower locomotion score (OR = 1.29; 95% CI, 1.07–1.56; p = 0.007) at discharge, having an increased number of medications (OR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01–1.25; p = 0.028) at discharge, and having a lower hemoglobin at discharge (OR = 1.31; 95% CI, 1.03–1.66; p = 0.031) were independently associated with 30‐day readmission.Conclusion and Relevance: Among adult patients with cancer discharged to home setting after acute inpatient rehabilitation, the 30‐day readmission rate of 21% was higher than that reported for other rehabilitation populations but within the range reported for patients with cancer who did not undergo acute inpatient rehabilitation.