Cited by 142Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchHealth Policy Implementation ScienceGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes

Implementing innovative models of dementia care: the healthy aging brain center

Open access
Boustani, Malaz A., Sachs, Greg A., Alder, Catherine A., Munger, Stephanie, Schubert, Cathy C., Guerriero Austrom, Mary, Hake, Ann M., Unverzagt, Frederick W. +5 more·2011·Aging & Mental Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the effectiveness of the collaborative dementia care model targeting both the patients suffering from dementia and their informal caregivers. OBJECTIVE: To implement a sustainable collaborative dementia care program in a public health care system in Indianapolis. METHODS: We used the framework of Complex Adaptive System and the tool of the Reflective Adaptive Process to translate the results of the dementia care trial into the Healthy Aging Brain Center (HABC). RESULTS: Within its first year of operation, the HABC delivered 528 visits to serve 208 patients and 176 informal caregivers. The mean age of HABC patients was 73.8 (standard deviation, SD 9.5), 40% were African-Americans, 42% had less than high school education, 14% had normal cognitive status, 39% received a diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment, and 46% were diagnosed with dementia. Within 12 months of the initial HABC visit, 28% of patients had at least one visit to an emergency room (ER) and 14% were hospitalized with a mean length of stay of five days. The rate of a one-week ER revisit was 14% and the 30-day rehospitalization rate was 11%. Only 5% of HABC patients received an order for neuroleptics and only 16% had simultaneous orders for both definite anticholinergic and anti-dementia drugs. CONCLUSION: The tools of 'implementation science' can be utilized to translate a health care delivery model developed in the research laboratory to a practical, operational, health care delivery program.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13607863.2010.496445

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Four studies tested the impact of post-discharge interventions on patient or caregiver outcomes.

    “Four studies tested the impact of post-discharge interventions on patient or caregiver outcomes. 20,21,23,24”

    From Interventions at Hospital Discharge to Guide Caregivers in Medication Management for People Living with Dementia: a Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Results and Evaluation Platform sections report patient outcomes, including emergency visits and 30-day readmissions, alongside a comparison with primary-care patients. But the intervention is described as dementia care with follow-up after an initial care-plan visit, not as a post-discharge intervention; the paper also says it did not evaluate the statistical significance of the comparison. This source cannot establish the citing sentence’s count of four studies. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The intervention components varied; one study tested only caregiver education while the remaining studies tested two or more components including caregiver education, discharge planning, follow-up visits, caregiver hotline, consultation with the geriatric team, counselling on caregiving skills, and medication review.

    “The intervention components varied; one study tested only caregiver education 23 while the remaining studies tested two or more components including caregiver education, 20 discharge planning, 20,21,24 follow-up visits, 21,24 caregiver hotline, 21 consultation with the geriatric team, 20,21,24 counselling on caregiving skills, 24 and medication review. 24”

    From Interventions at Hospital Discharge to Guide Caregivers in Medication Management for People Living with Dementia: a Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Results section (‘The Operation of the Healthy Aging Brain Center’; page unavailable) describes follow-up visits, caregiver-skills counseling, team-based care, and physician review of medications. It does not describe discharge planning as an intervention component, and it describes implementation of a care model rather than a study testing those components. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Three studies evaluated post-discharge interventions which had a number of components including caregiver education, caregiver support, follow-up (face-to-face) visits, home visits, telephone call/email, caregiver hot-line, and medication review.

    “Three studies evaluated postdischarge interventions which had a number of components including caregiver education, caregiver support, follow-up (face-to-face) visits, home visits, telephone call/email, caregiver hot-line, and medication review. 21,23,24”

    From Interventions at Hospital Discharge to Guide Caregivers in Medication Management for People Living with Dementia: a Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Results section, under “The Operation of the Healthy Aging Brain Center” (page unavailable), describes caregiver education and support, face-to-face follow-up, telephone contact, and medication management. It describes follow-up after an initial care-plan visit, not a postdischarge intervention, and does not establish home visits, email contact, or a formal medication review as components of this program. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In another study employing a multi-component post-discharge intervention, a reduction in the proportion of patients hospitalized within 30 days of discharge was reported.

    “in another study, which employed a multi-component post-discharge intervention, reduction in the proportion of patients hospitalized within 30 days of discharge was reported. 24”

    From Interventions at Hospital Discharge to Guide Caregivers in Medication Management for People Living with Dementia: a Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Results section, “The Performance of the Healthy Aging Brain Center” (page unavailable), reports that 11% of hospitalized HABC patients were readmitted within 30 days, compared with 20% of primary-care patients. However, “The Operation of the Healthy Aging Brain Center” describes follow-up after an initial care-plan visit, not a post-discharge intervention; the comparison also does not establish that the intervention caused a reduction. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Only two studies tested a post-discharge intervention that had more than one component.

    “Only two studies tested a post-discharge intervention that had more than one component. 21,24”

    From Interventions at Hospital Discharge to Guide Caregivers in Medication Management for People Living with Dementia: a Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) mentions two randomized trials of a collaborative dementia-care model, and the Results section describes an individualized care plan with eight components. Neither passage identifies those trials or the Healthy Aging Brain Center program as post-discharge interventions, so the post-discharge part of the claim is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boustani, M. A., Sachs, G. A., Alder, C. A., Munger, S., Schubert, C. C., Guerriero Austrom, M., Hake, A. M., Unverzagt, F. W., Farlow, M., Matthews, B. R., Perkins, A. J., Beck, R. A., & Callahan, C. M.
Affiliations
  • Regenstrief Institute (US)
  • Indiana University Indianapolis (US)
  • f Department of Psychiatry , Indiana University School of Medicine , Indianapolis , IN , USA
  • Indiana University School of Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Boustani, Malaz A.
Venue
Aging & Mental Health
Published
2011-01
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
13-22
ISSN
  • 1360-7863 (ISSN-L)
  • 1364-6915
OpenAlex
W2017215880
Cited by
142
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 5
FWCI
7.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Aging & Mental Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • School of Medicine, Indiana University
  • National Institute on Aging (AG010133, P30AG010133, K24 AG026770, K24AG024078, K23AG026770, R01AG029884, P30AG024967)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Keywords
dementia care, collaborative care, implementation science, complex adaptive systems, informal caregivers, emergency department visits, hospital readmission, anticholinergic agents, public health care system
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Community Mental Health Centers, Dementia, Female, Humans, Indiana, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Primary Health Care, Program Development, Models, Organizational, Patient-Centered Care, Organizational Case Studies, Quality Indicators, Health Care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review