Dementia care management in primary care

Current collaborative care models and the case for interprofessional education
  • Adina Dreier-Wolfgramm
  • Bernhard Michalowsky
  • Mary Guerriero Austrom
  • Marjolein A. van der Marck
  • Steve Iliffe
  • Catherine Alder
  • Horst Christian Vollmar
  • Jochen René Thyrian
  • Diana Wucherer
  • Ina Zwingmann
  • Wolfgang Hoffmann
Beiträge zum Themenschwerpunkt

Abstract

Background

Dementia is one of the most prevalent diseases in the older population. Various dementia care models have been developed to address patient’s healthcare needs. They can be described as “collaborative care” or “person-centered care”. Referring to the needs of the workforce working with persons with dementia, a key element is the use of interprofessional education (IPE).

Objective

The purpose of this article is to describe different international collaborative care models to define a minimum standard of healthcare professions for collaborative dementia care in primary care. This helps to identify requirements for IPE to optimize care of people with dementia and to support informal caregivers in the future.

Material and methods

In this article six dementia care models from 4 different countries (Germany, USA, UK and Netherlands) are described and compared regarding aims, interventions and healthcare professionals involved.

Results

Care teams are minimally comprised of general practitioners or primary care providers, nurses, and social workers. Additional healthcare disciplines may be involved for specific interventions. Mostly, care team members received specific training but such training did not necessarily incorporate the IPE approach. To ensure successful collaboration of professions, IPE training programs should at least consist of the following core topics: (1) early diagnosis, (2) postdiagnostic support, (3) advanced care planning for patients and caregivers and (4) effective collaborative care.

Conclusion

The IPE programs for dementia should be expanded and must be widely implemented in order to assess the impact on collaborative practice. This study will provide the knowledge base for structuring IPE trainings developing educational agendas and adapting existing guidelines to improve collaborative dementia care in the future.

Keywords

Dementia Primary care Patient care planning Interdisciplinary communication Interprofessional education 

Versorgungsmanagement bei Demenz in der Primärversorgung

Aktuelle kooperative Versorgungsmodelle und der Vorteil von interprofessionellem Lernen

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Demenz ist eine der häufigsten Erkrankungen im höheren Alter und erfordert innovative Konzepte zur Versorgung der Betroffenen. Um Gesundheitsberufe adäquat auf eine patientenzentrierte, interprofessionelle Demenzversorgung vorzubereiten hat sich das interprofessionelle Lernen (IPL) bewährt.

Ziel der Arbeit

Ziel ist es, Versorgungskonzepte für Menschen mit Demenz zu beschreiben und einen Mindeststandard an Professionen zu definieren, die an der patientenzentrierten Demenzversorgung beteiligt werden sollten, sowie Erfordernisse an das IPL zu identifizieren.

Material und Methoden

Sechs Versorgungskonzepte aus 4 Ländern (Deutschland, USA, Großbritannien, Niederlande) werden hinsichtlich ihrer Ziele, Interventionen und involvierten Gesundheitsfachberufe verglichen, um Rückschlüsse für das IPL zu ziehen.

Ergebnisse

Hausärzte, Pflegefachpersonen und Sozialarbeiter sind in allen Ländern Teil des Versorgungsteams. Weitere Gesundheitsberufe werden für spezifische Interventionen einbezogen. Die Mitglieder des Versorgungsteams werden zumeist speziell qualifiziert, jedoch nicht im interprofessionellen Lernansatz. IPL Qualifikationen sollten mindestens folgende Themenbereiche umfassen: (1) frühe Diagnostik, (2) Versorgung nach Diagnosestellung, (3) effektives Versorgungsmanagement und (4) interprofessionelle Zusammenarbeit.

Diskussion

IPL sollte künftig für das Krankheitsbild Demenz ausgeweitet sowie weitreichend implementiert und evaluiert werden, um den Nutzen für die interprofessionelle Teamarbeit in der Praxis zu überprüfen. Dies ist die Basis, um länderspezifische IPL Bildungsprogramme zu entwickeln und bestehende Versorgungsleitlinien für eine verbesserte interprofessionelle Demenzversorgung im ambulanten Setting anzupassen.

Schlüsselwörter

Demenz Primärversorgung Planung der Patientenversorgung Interdisziplinäre Kommunikation Interprofessionelles Lernen 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The DelpHi trial was developed and established as a result of input from the following experts in their respective fields: Aniela Angelow, Grit Aßmann, Georgia Böwing, Thomas Fiß, Daniel Fredrich, Leonore Köhler, and Steffen Richter. An experienced field study team provided support with data collection and data management: Ines Abraham, Kerstin Albuerne, Vaska Böhmann, Kathleen Dittmer, Sarah Gardzella, Jana Hubert, Ulrike Kempe, Viktoriya Kim, Julius Krause, Andrea Pooch, Saskia Moll, Sabine Schmidt, and Christine Winckler. The authors thank all participating patients and their general practitioners for their most valued collaboration. The study is funded by the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE) and the University Medicine Greifswald. Dr. Guerriero Austrom was supported in part by NIA Grant No. P30AG10133.

Compliance with ethical guidelines

Conflict of interests

A. Dreier-Wolfgramm, B. Michalowsky, M.G. Austrom, M.A. van der Marck, S. Iliffe, C. Alder, H.C. Vollmar, J.R. Thyrian, D. Wucherer, I. Zwingmann and W. Hoffmann declare that they have no competing interests.

All procedures of the six described studies were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible ethics committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 (in its most recently amended version). Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

The supplement containing this article is not sponsored by industry.

References

  1. 1.
    Alzheimer’s Disease International (2015) World Alzheimer Report 2015. The Global Impact of Dementia. An analysis of prevalence, incidence, cost and trends https://www.alz.co.uk/research/WorldAlzheimerReport2015.pdf. Accessed 23.03.2017
  2. 2.
    Austrom MG et al (2015) Workforce development to provide person-centered care. Aging Ment Health 20(8):781–792. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2015.1119802 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Galvin JE, Valois L, Zweig Y (2014) Collaborative transdisciplinary team approach for dementia care. Neurodegener Dis Manag 4(6):455–469CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Reilly S et al (2015) Case management approaches to home support for people with dementia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev:. doi: 10.1002/14651858.cd008345.pub2 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Prince M et al (2016) World Alzheimer Report 2016 – Improving healthcare for people living with dementia: coverage, quality and costs now and in the future, p 140Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stephan A et al (2015) Successful collaboration in dementia care from the perspectives of healthcare professionals and informal carers in Germany: results from a focus group study. BMC Health Serv Res 15:208CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cartwright J et al (2015) Promoting collaborative dementia care via online interprofessional education. Australas J Ageing 34(2):88–94CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thyrian JR et al (2012) Life- and person-centred help in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany (DelpHi): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 13:56CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Calabrese P, Kessler J (2000) Screening for cognitive impairment in dementia – the DemTect procedure. European Neuropsychopharmacology 10:369Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thyrian JR et al (2016) Relatives’ burden of caring for people screened positive for dementia in primary care : results of the Delphi study. Z Gerontol Geriatr 50:4. doi: 10.1007/s00391-016-1119-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eichler T et al (2014) Dementia care management: going new ways in ambulant dementia care within a GP-based randomized controlled intervention trial. Int Psychogeriatr 26(2):247–256CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    LaMantia MA et al (2015) The aging brain care medical home: preliminary data. J Am Geriatr Soc 63(6):1209–1213CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dreier A et al (2016) Qualifications for nurses for the care of patients with dementia and support to their caregivers: a pilot evaluation of the dementia care management curriculum. Nurse Educ Today 36:310–317CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Callahan CM et al (2011) Implementing dementia care models in primary care settings: the aging brain care medical home. Aging Ment Health 15(1):5–12CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Iliffe S et al (2015) Changing practice in dementia care in the community: developing and testing evidence-based interventions, from timely diagnosis to end of life (EVIDEM). NIHR Journals Library, Southampton, p 636Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wilcock J et al (2016) Diagnosis and management of dementia in family practice. Aging Ment Health 20(4):362–369CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wilcock J et al (2013) Tailored educational intervention for primary care to improve the management of dementia: the EVIDEM-ED cluster randomized controlled trial. Trials 14:397CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Iliffe S et al (2014) The effectiveness of collaborative care for people with memory problems in primary care: results of the CAREDEM case management modelling and feasibility study. Health Technol Assess 18(52):1–148CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bamford C et al (2014) Understanding the challenges to implementing case management for people with dementia in primary care in England: a qualitative study using Normalization Process Theory. BMC Health Serv Res 14:549CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Radboud university medical centre (Radboudumc) (2016) R.I.f.H.S. DementieNet. http://www.dementienet.com/. Accessed 23.08.2016Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wubbeler M et al (2016) How do people with dementia utilise primary care physicians and specialists within dementia networks? Results of the Dementia Networks in Germany (DemNet-D) study. Health Soc Care Community 25:285. doi: 10.1111/hsc.12315 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wübbeler M et al (2015) Outpatient care of people with dementia within residential communities in Germany - care potential and cost. Gesundheitswesen 77(11):839–844PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reeves S et al (2008) Interprofessional education: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev:. doi: 10.1002/14651858.cd002213.pub2 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zorek J, Raehl C (2013) Interprofessional education accreditation standards in the USA: a comparative analysis. J Interprof Care 27(2):123–130CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    World Health Organization (2010) Framework for action on interprofessional education & collaborative practice, p 64Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Iliffe S et al (2010) Evidence-based interventions in dementia: a pragmatic cluster-randomised trial of an educational intervention to promote earlier recognition and response to dementia in primary care (EVIDEM-ED). Trials 11:13CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chalk A, Page S (2016) Dementia RED (Respect Empathy Dignity): Collaborating to build dementia supportive communities in North Wales–reporting on a pilot project (innovative practice). Dementia (London) 15(2):257–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pelone F et al (2015) Interprofessional education in the care of people diagnosed with dementia: protocol for a systematic review. BMJ Open 5(4):e007490CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Downs M et al (2006) Effectiveness of educational interventions in improving detection and management of dementia in primary care: cluster randomised controlled study. BMJ 332(7543):692–696CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Brody AA, Galvin JE (2013) A review of interprofessional dissemination and education interventions for recognizing and managing dementia. Gerontol Geriatr Educ 34(3):225–256CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Turner S et al (2004) General practitioners’ knowledge, confidence and attitudes in the diagnosis and management of dementia. Age Ageing 33(5):461–467CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adina Dreier-Wolfgramm
    • 1
  • Bernhard Michalowsky
    • 2
  • Mary Guerriero Austrom
    • 3
  • Marjolein A. van der Marck
    • 4
  • Steve Iliffe
    • 5
  • Catherine Alder
    • 6
  • Horst Christian Vollmar
    • 7
    • 8
  • Jochen René Thyrian
    • 2
  • Diana Wucherer
    • 2
  • Ina Zwingmann
    • 2
  • Wolfgang Hoffmann
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute for Community Medicine, Dept. Epidemiology of Health Care and Community HealthUniversity Medicine GreifswaldGreifswaldGermany
  2. 2.German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)Rostock/GreifswaldGermany
  3. 3.Department of Psychiatry, Indiana Alzheimer Disease Center, Indiana University Center for Aging Research (IU-CAR)Indiana University School of Medicine (IUSM)IndianapolisUSA
  4. 4.Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Geriatric Medicine/Radboudumc Alzheimer CentreRadboud university medical centreNijmegenNetherlands
  5. 5.Research Department of Primary Care & Population HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  6. 6.USA Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Eskenazi HealthIndianapolisUSA
  7. 7.Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Jena University HospitalFriedrich-Schiller-UniversityJenaGermany
  8. 8.Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, University Hospital DüsseldorfHeinrich-Heine-UniversityDüsseldorfGermany

Personalised recommendations