The impact of residential respite care on the behavior of older people

Background: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of residential respite care on disruptive behavior displayed by older people, particularly those with dementia. Methods: A quasi-experimental, repeated-measures, single-group design was used. The participants were a consecutive series of 100 older people with a mean age of 81.8 years (range 66-96 years) who had been booked for a respite admission to one of several residential aged care facilities in a provincial Australian city. A diagnosis of dementia was reported for 29% of the sample. Disruptive behaviors were rated before and after the period of respite by home caregivers (N = 100) and during the period of respite by nurses (N= 25) using the Dementia Behavior Disturbance Scale (DBDS). Results: Age, male gender and the presence of dementia were all significantly related to the frequency of reported disruptive behaviors. Residential respite care was associated with a significant reduction in the frequency of reported disruptive behaviors in older people (Wald chi(2) = 28.28, P < 0.0001). However, this improvement in behavior did not persist into the post-respite period. The deteriorating behavioral trajectory that was evident prior to respite care continued following the period of respite care. Conclusions: Residential respite care was associated with a temporary diminution in the frequency of reported disruptive behaviors in older people. This finding should be reassuring both for family carets considering placing a relative in residential respite care and for health workers considering whether to recommend such a course of action.

Supportive care needs of people with brain tumours and their carers

Goals of work: The diagnosis and treatment of a brain tumour may result in long-term changes in a patient's functional and social abilities and/or in a greatly reduced life span. A qualitative investigation was conducted to examine the supportive care needs of patients with brain tumour and their carers. Materials and methods: Overall, 18 patients and 18 carers participated in focus groups or telephone interviews, following a structured interview guide to elicit supportive care services of importance to these patients and carers. Main results: Six major themes were identified using the framework analysis method, including needs for information and coping with uncertainty, practical support, support to return to pretreatment responsibilities or prepare for long-term care, support to deal with social isolation and organize respite care, support to overcome stigma/discrimination and support to discuss potentially reduced life expectancy. Conclusions: Five recommendations to improve service delivery include: assignment of a dedicated member of the care team or case manager; proactive dissemination of information, education and psychosocial support; access to objective assessment of neuropsychological functioning; facilitating easier access to welfare payments; and services facilitating communication about difficult illness-related topics. Provision of services along these recommendations could improve supportive care of brain tumour patients and their carers.