Dataset Information

E-Learning and Web-Based Tools for Psychosocial Interventions Addressing Neuropsychiatric Symptoms of Dementia During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Tokyo, Japan: Quasi-Experimental Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Concern has been raised that the COVID-19 pandemic and consequent social distancing measures may increase neuropsychiatric symptoms in people with dementia. Thus, we developed and delivered an e-learning training course to professional caregivers on using a web-based tool for psychosocial interventions for people with dementia.

Objective

The aim of our study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of an e-learning course in combination with a web-based tool in addressing neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia.

Methods

A quasi-experimental design was used in Tokyo, Japan. The e-learning course was delivered three times to professional caregivers between July and December 2020. Caregivers who completed the course assessed the level of neuropsychiatric symptoms in people with dementia using the total score from the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) via a web-based tool. The primary outcome measures were the number of caregivers who implemented follow-up NPI evaluations by March 2021 and the change in NPI scores from baseline to their most recent follow-up evaluations. As a control group, information was also obtained from professional caregivers who completed a face-to-face training course using the same web-based tool between July 2019 and March 2020.

Results

A total of 268 caregivers completed the e-learning course in 2020. Of the 268 caregivers, 56 (20.9%) underwent follow-up evaluations with 63 persons with dementia. The average NPI score was significantly reduced from baseline (mean 20.4, SD 16.2) to the most recent follow-up evaluations (mean 14.3, SD 13.4). The effect size was assumed to be medium (Cohen d_{rm [repeated measures]}=0.40). The control group consisted of 252 caregivers who completed a face-to-face training course. Of the 252 caregivers, 114 (45.2%) underwent follow-up evaluations. Compared to the control group, caregivers who completed the e-learning course were significantly less likely to implement follow-up evaluations (χ²₁=52.0, P<.001). The change in NPI scores did not differ according to the type of training course (baseline-adjusted difference=-0.61, P=.69).

Conclusions

The replacement of face-to-face training with e-learning may have provided professionals with an opportunity to participate in the dementia behavior analysis and support enhancement (DEMBASE) program who may not have participated in the program otherwise. Although the program showed equal efficacy in terms of the two training courses, the feasibility was suboptimal with lower implementation levels for those receiving e-learning training. Thus, further strategies should be developed to improve feasibility by providing motivational triggers for implementation and technical support for care professionals. Using online communities in the program should also be investigated.

SUBMITTER: Nakanishi M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8513743 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMost of patients with dementia are cared for by family members. Caring for people with dementia is challenging; approximately 30-55% of caregivers suffered from anxiety or depressive symptoms. A range of studies have shown that psychosocial interventions are effective and can improve caregivers' quality of life, reduce their care burden, and ease their anxiety or depressive symptoms. However, information on the acceptability of these interventions, despite being crucial, is under-reported.MethodsSystematic searches of databases were conducted for literature published on EMBASE, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PsycARTICLES until August 2017 and the searches were updated on June 2018. The selection criteria included primary studies with data about the acceptability of psychosocial interventions for informal caregivers and publications written in English. Two authors independently selected studies, extracted study characteristics and data, assessed the methodological quality of the included studies by using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Qualitative Research Checklist, and conducted a narrative synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data.ResultsA total of 10,610 abstracts were identified through systematic searches. Based on screening titles and abstracts, 207 papers were identified that met the criteria for full paper review, with 42 papers from 13 different countries meeting the inclusion criteria. We found high- and moderate-quality evidence showing psychosocial interventions were acceptable, with important benefits for caregivers. Facilitators of acceptability included caregivers' need for intervention, appropriate content and organization of the intervention, and knowledge and professionalism of the staff. Barriers to acceptability included participants' poor health status and low education levels, caregiving burden, change of intervention implementers, and poor system performance of interventions.ConclusionThere is preliminary evidence to support the acceptability of psychosocial interventions for dementia caregivers. However, the available supporting evidence is limited, and there is currently no adequate information from these studies indicating that the acceptability has received enough attention from researchers. More well-designed studies assessing psychosocial interventions are needed to give specific statements about acceptability, and the measure of acceptability with psychosocial interventions should be more comprehensive.

Project description:BackgroundPrescribing trends suggest that pharmacologic alternatives to antipsychotics are gaining in popularity, but randomized trial (RCT) data of their comparative safety is scarce. Our objective was to describe the comparative safety of pharmacologic interventions for treating neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, from inception to May 28, 2019, for studies of pharmacologic interventions used to treat neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia. Dementia care partners selected fracture risk as our primary outcome. Pairs of reviewers, working independently, conducted all study screening, data abstraction, and risk of bias appraisal. We conducted Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses (NMAs) using data from RCTs to derive odds ratios (ORs). In secondary analyses, we conducted frequentist random-effects NMAs using data from RCTs and Bayesian three-level hierarchical random-effects NMAs incorporating data from RCTs and non-randomized studies.ResultsOur systematic review included 209 randomized and non-randomized studies (889,378 persons with dementia). In NMAs of data from randomized trials, there were no increased odds of fracture associated with any intervention in primary analyses; however, data were sparse. We found increased odds of cerebrovascular events associated with antipsychotics (odds ratio [OR] 2.12, 95% credible interval [CrI] 1.29 to 3.62; number needed to harm [NNH] = 99) and increased odds of falls associated with dextromethorphan-quinidine (OR 4.16, 95% CrI 1.47 to 14.22; NNH = 55) compared to placebo in persons with dementia. In a subgroup of persons with Alzheimer disease, antipsychotics were associated with increased odds of fracture compared to anticonvulsants (OR 54.1, 95% CrI 1.15 to 38,300; NNH = 18). In older persons (mean age ≥ 80 years) with dementia, anticonvulsants were associated with increased odds of death compared to placebo (OR 8.36, 95% CrI 1.17 to 203.4; NNH = 35) and antipsychotics were associated with increased odds of death compared to antidepressants (OR 5.28, 95% CrI 1.06 to 3.51; NNH = 47).ConclusionAlthough antipsychotics were associated with greater harm than antidepressants and anticonvulsants in subgroups of persons with dementia, medications used in lieu of antipsychotics for treating neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia, such as anticonvulsants and dextromethorphan-quinidine, were also associated with harm. Decision-making concerning treatments prescribed in lieu of antipsychotics should include potential harms.Prospero registrationCRD42017050130.

Project description:BackgroundHealth policy promotes post-diagnostic support for people affected by dementia. Evidence suggests psychosocial interventions can effectively support people living with dementia after diagnosis. Yet, what influences uptake of psychosocial interventions by people with early dementia is poorly understood. This research aimed to identify influences on uptake of psychosocial interventions by people with early dementia.MethodsSixteen face-to-face semi-structured interviews with people with early dementia, either alone or with a family member(s), were completed. Twelve staff participated in semi-structured interviews or a focus group. Thematic analysis and triangulation enabled identification of overall themes across different participant groups and interview types.Main findingsFour overarching themes influencing uptake were identified: (1) adjusting to a diagnosis, (2) appeal of activities and perception of benefit, (3) service and societal context, and (4) relationships and communication. Individual responses to diagnosis, experiences of dementia and dementia services influenced uptake. Group interventions were discussed the most by all participants. Group interventions offering social contact, peer support, information, enjoyable activities and mental stimulation were valued. However, group interventions specifically aimed at people with dementia did not appeal to all. Ability to travel and convenience of locations were important. Continuing with community activities not focused on dementia was valued. Stigma around dementia appeared to discourage uptake. Emotional and practical support from family was key to facilitating uptake as were the relationships between people with dementia and staff.ConclusionA complex interplay of individual, service and societal influences affect uptake of psychosocial interventions by people with early dementia. How interventions and which services can enable people with early dementia remain engaged in their everyday lives needs consideration. Further research examining uptake of specific interventions commonly offered to people living with early dementia is needed. Involving people with early dementia in designing interventions aiming to support them is paramount.

Project description:BackgroundMore than 135 million people worldwide live with acquired brain injury (ABI) and its many psychosocial sequelae. This growing global burden necessitates scalable rehabilitation services. Despite demonstrated potential to increase the accessibility and scalability of psychosocial supports, digital health interventions are challenging to implement and sustain. The Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework can offer developers and researchers a comprehensive overview of considerations to implement, scale, and sustain digital health interventions.ObjectiveThis systematic review identified published, peer-reviewed primary evidence of implementation outcomes, strategies, and factors for web-based psychosocial interventions targeting either adults with ABI or their formal or informal caregivers; evaluated and summarized this evidence; synthesized qualitative and quantitative implementation data according to the NASSS framework; and provided recommendations for future implementation. Results were compared with 3 hypotheses which state that complexity (dynamic, unpredictable, and poorly characterized factors) in most or all NASSS domains increases likelihood of implementation failure; success is achievable, but difficult with many complicated domains (containing multiple interacting factors); and simplicity (straightforward, predictable, and few factors) in most or all domains increases the likelihood of success.MethodsFrom a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, speechBITE, and neuroBITE, we reviewed primary implementation evidence from January 2008 to June 2020. For web-based psychosocial interventions delivered via standard desktop computer, mobile phone, tablet, television, and virtual reality devices to adults with ABI or their formal or informal caregivers, we extracted intervention characteristics, stakeholder involvement, implementation scope and outcomes, study design and quality, and implementation data. Implementation data were both narratively synthesized and descriptively quantified across all 7 domains (condition, technology, value proposition, adopters, organization, wider system, and their interaction over time) and all subdomains of the NASSS framework. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the 2018 Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.ResultsWe identified 60 peer-reviewed studies from 12 countries, including 5723 adults with ABI, 1920 carers, and 50 health care staff. The findings aligned with all 3 hypotheses.ConclusionsAlthough studies were of low methodological quality and insufficient number to statistically test relationships, the results appeared consistent with recommendations to reduce complexity as much as possible to facilitate implementation. Although studies excluded individuals with a range of comorbidities and sociocultural challenges, such simplification of NASSS domain 1 may have been necessary to advance intervention value propositions (domain 3). However, to create equitable digital health solutions that can be successfully implemented in real-world settings, it is recommended that developers involve people with ABI, their close others, and health care staff in addressing complexities in domains 2 to 7 from the earliest intervention design stages.Trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020186387; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020186387.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1177/20552076211035988.

Project description:BackgroundAdult Day care centres provide an important aspect of care provision through all phases of the dementia illness from diagnosis to the end of life (Dabelko HI 2008) supporting the well-being of both older people living with dementia and their care partners. Services within adult day care settings are designed to provide biopsychosocial health benefits to participants as well as care partner respite.ObjectiveTo examine research studies, literature reviews and grey literature and identify and map the literature on psychosocial interventions used in day care services for older people living with dementia and chart their use, evaluation and outcomes. The research review question is "what are the psychosocial interventions used in day care service for older people living with dementia?" Psychosocial interventions are important non-pharmacological interventions which support people's wellbeing.MethodsInclusion/Exclusion criteria were identified and guided the search strategy. Participants were people aged 60 years and over living with dementia attending day care services. The use of psychosocial interventions for this cohort was the focus of the review. Databases were searched (Cochrane Reviews, CINAHL, Embase, Medline EBSCO, Medline Ovid, Medline PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Open Grey, Lenus and WHO Global Index Medicus databases) using keywords/terms with Boolean operators from 2011 to 2023. Rayyan was used to extract and manage the data.ResultsThe findings present a narrative and charting of the data from the 45 papers that met the review criteria, and this data is mapped onto the five objectives. Within this review, interventions were grouped into five broad types: nature (n = 6 papers), memory/cognitive (n = 11 papers), social (n = 17 papers), animal (n = 4 papers), or physical/sensory (n = 7 papers) based interventions.ConclusionsThis review has illustrated the wide variety in the types, range and facilitation of psychosocial interventions within adult day care services. This review highlights the potential benefits of these interventions. However, findings must be considered in the context that many were provided as brief intervention studies with little evidence of continuation after the study and further research is required given the complex and diverse range of interventions. Results will be of interest to practitioners planning to implement or evaluate psychosocial interventions used in day care services for older people living with dementia.