Integrated care that focuses on organising healthcare services around people and their communities rather than their diseases is promoted as the strategy to overcome the challenges associated with growing complexity in healthcare needs, demand for healthcare services and inadequate supply of services due to fragmentation in the provision of services. While conceptually appears to be simple, integrated care is made up of multicomponent delivery strategies targeting various levels of the healthcare system while engaging various stakeholders in their execution. We applied the complex adaptive system (CAS) perspective to two different initiatives that exemplify approaches towards integrating care in Singapore: the Regional Health System (RHS) model, implemented across healthcare institutions at the national level, and CARITAS Integrated Dementia Care implemented in the northern region of Singapore. We adopted an inductive approach in our analysis in which we studied the RHS and CARITAS Integrated Dementia Care according to the components of the CAS. We applied the typical characteristics of CAS: (i) diverse, interdependent and semi-autonomous actors (ii) self-organizing capacity and simple rules (iii) relationship with the bigger system, emergent behaviour and non-linearity in our analysis of key drivers behind the implementation of both the RHS and CARITAS integrated dementia care. By considering the RHS and CARITAS as whole networks each comprising of interacting and adaptive components instead of separate entities within a bigger system, the CAS provided a new mind-set in surfacing issues associated to the implementation of these integrated care networks. In addition to important actors, systems, it informed understanding of relationships and dependencies between different parts of the network - revealing the lack of homogeneity, conformity and difficulties in designing any optimal system in advance given the many moving parts. Drawing on the two examples of integrated care networks, this paper highlights the significance of effective collaboration built on a common focus, responsiveness to emergent behaviours, simple rules, the ability to self-organize and adapt in response to unexpected situations in further development of integrated care in the Singapore context and beyond.

Background/Aims: The psychometric properties of Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) have never been substantively investigated in caregivers of persons with dementia (PwD). We evaluated the validity and reliability of CES-D for detecting caregiver depression in dementia, and assessed whether CES-D could provide added utility beyond Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI). Method: Family caregivers of community-dwelling PwD (n = 394) completed self-administered questionnaires containing CES-D. Factorial validity was evaluated with confirmatory factor analysis; convergent and discriminant validity with Pearson’s correlation coefficient; known-group validity by comparing across key variables; and internal consistency reliability with Cronbach’s α. Cohen’s κ was used to compare the agreement between those with depression (CES-D ≥16) and those with high caregiver burden (ZBI >60). Results: CES-D demonstrated convergent, discriminant and known-group validity, consistent with a priori hypotheses. The original four-factor model of CES-D produced the best model-fit indices. Internal consistency reliability was good for the CES-D total scale (α = 0.92), but lower for the Positive affect and Interpersonal problems subscales (α = 0.70–0.74). Forty-five percent of the caregivers had depression as identified by CES-D (95% CI 40–50%), but most of them were not identified by high ZBI scores (κ = 0.16). Conclusions: CES-D is a valid and reliable scale for detecting caregiver depression in dementia. It has added utility, beyond that of a caregiver burden scale, in identifying a subgroup of caregivers with depression but not burden. However, two subscales (Positive affect and Interpersonal problems) may require caution in interpretation among non-Caucasian caregivers.

Background:Although foreign domestic workers (FDWs) play a significant role in caring for frail seniors in Singapore and are vulnerable to caregiving burden, there has been little research conducted hitherto. We explored caregiver burden and its determinants in this study.Methods:FDWs (N = 221, Mage = 32.3, SD = 6.23) recruited from a hospital geriatric unit completed the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) administered in English, Bahasa Melayu, or Burmese. Univariate and multivariate regression were employed to investigate factors influencing caregiving burden in FDWs.Results:Majority were Indonesians (60.0%), married (57.5%) with children (62.4%), with secondary-level education (59.7%), and providing care for >1 year (79.9%). Importantly, 25.1% reported physical health problems and 23.1% encountered language difficulties with employers. Univariate analysis revealed three significant factors associated with caregiving burden: nationality (p < 0.001), lack of privacy (p = 0.029), and caring for persons with dementia (PWD) (p = 0.001). On multivariate regression, FDWs who cared for PWD were 5.47 times (p = 0.013) more likely to experience burden, while FDWs who encountered language difficulties were 5.46 times (p = 0.030) more likely to experience burden. Filipinos FDWs were 9.73 times more likely to express burden (p < 0.001) compared to their Indonesian and Burmese counterparts.Conclusion:The study highlights caregiver burden in FDWs and potential ways to alleviate it by empowering FDWs with dementia-specific caregiving skills, providing language training opportunities, and supporting particular FDW ethnic groups with more emotional and practical help.

Introduction: Patients with dementia (PWDs) are often subjected to enforced dependency and experience functional decline and emotional distress during hospital stay. Person‐centered care (PCC) with specialized psychosocial interventions, minimally obtrusive medical care, and physical restraints‐free practice holds potential to improve patient outcomes. We evaluate the effectiveness of an acute hospital dementia unit (Care for Acute Mentally Infirm Elders [CAMIE]) that adopts a PCC protocol. Methods: Prospective naturalistic cohort study whereby PWDs in the CAMIE unit ( n = 170) were compared with a control group in usual care wards ( n = 60) over 6 months. Assessments included patient demographics, dementia type and stage, comorbidities (Charlson's Comorbidity Index), acute illness severity, Well‐Being, Ill‐Being, functional status (Modified Barthel Index), agitation levels (Pittsburgh Agitation Scale), and quality of life (EuroQoL), assessed on admission and discharge. Multivariate analysis of covariance examined the effect of CAMIE versus usual care on pre‐post outcomes. Results: CAMIE patients showed statistically significant greater gains in Modified Barthel Index function and Well‐Being, decreased Ill‐Being and agitation, and greater improvement in EuroQoL index score (effect size: Δ = 0.18) after adjusting for baseline differences that translated to a quality‐adjusted life years gain of 0.045, assuming stability over 3 months. Estimating added cost of CAMIE stay over usual care at SGD 1500 (USD 1040) for average length of stay of 15 days per patient, the incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio fell within the threshold for cost‐effectiveness at USD 23,111. Discussion: PCC for PWDs in acute hospitals not only improves clinical outcomes for patients but is also cost‐effective. The results support the adoption of PCC on a wider scale for better care of PWDs.

Background: Studies report varying rates and predictors of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) progression and reversion. Methods: We determined MCI reversion and progression among 473 community-living adults aged ≥55 years in the Singapore Longitudinal Ageing Study with an average of 6 years of follow-up and estimated association with baseline variables. Results: A total of 208 MCI participants reverted to normal cognition (44.0%) and 19 progressed to dementia (4.0%). In a model adjusted for age, gender, education, ethnicity, cardiovascular risk factors/diseases, APOE ε4 status, depressive symptoms, leisure-time activities (LTA), and baseline Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), we found that LTA score (OR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.02–1.13), MMSE score (OR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.11–1.31), and subjective memory complaint (OR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.16–2.90) significantly predicted MCI reversion. Controlling for all variables, age (OR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.02–1.17), lower education (OR = 3.26, 95% CI 1.01–10.49), and the metabolic syndrome (OR = 3.13, 95% CI 1.12–8.77) significantly predicted MCI progression. Controlling for age, sex, ethnicity, and education, diabetes significantly predicted MCI progression (OR = 3.19, 95% CI 1.23–8.26), but the presence of other cardiometabolic factors reduced this association to an OR of 2.18 (95% CI 0.72–6.60). Conclusion: In this relatively younger population, there were higher rates of MCI reversion and lower rates of MCI progression which were predicted by the positive effects of LTA and a higher MMSE score as well as by the deleterious effect of the metabolic syndrome and diabetes.

Background: The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scale is widely used to assess cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease. It requires collateral information from a reliable informant who is not available in many instances. We adapted the original CDR scale for use with elderly subjects without an informant (CDR-NI) and evaluated its reliability and validity for assessing mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia among community-dwelling elderly subjects. Method: At two consecutive visits 1 week apart, nurses trained in CDR assessment interviewed, observed and rated cognitive and functional performance according to a protocol in 90 elderly subjects with suboptimal cognitive performance [Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) <26 and/or Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) <26] and without informants according to a protocol. CDR domains and global scores were assigned after the second visit based upon corroborative information from the subjects' responses to questions, role-play, and observed performance in specifically assigned tasks at home and within the community. Results: The CDR-NI scores (0, 0.5, 1) showed good internal consistency (Crohnbach's a 0.83-0.84), inter-rater reliability (κ 0.77-1.00 for six domains and 0.95 for global rating) and test-retest reliability (κ 0.75-1.00 for six domains and 0.80 for global rating), good agreement (κ 0.79) with the clinical assessment status of MCI (n = 37) and dementia (n = 4) and significant differences in the mean scores for MMSE, MOCA and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (ANOVA global p < 0.001). Conclusion: Owing to the protocol of the interviews, assessments and structured observations gathered during the two visits, CDR-NI provides valid and reliable assessment of MCI and dementia in community-living elderly subjects without an informant.