Cited by 24Health Policy Implementation ScienceDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchHealth Sciences Research and Education

Dissemination of a successful dementia care program: Lessons to facilitate spread of innovations

Open access
Reuben, David B., Evertson, Leslie Chang, Jackson‐Stoeckle, Rebecca, Epstein‐Lubow, Gary, Spragens, Lynn Hill, Haggerty, Kristin Lees, Serrano, Katherine Sy, Jennings, Lee A.·2022·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

Background: Despite the effectiveness of innovations to improve the care of persons with dementia, there has been limited diffusion of these into widespread clinical practice. We aimed to identify common barriers and address them directly in the initial phase of dissemination of a successful dementia care program. Methods: Description of and early experience with a dissemination strategy of the UCLA Alzheimer's and Dementia Care Program to health care systems nationwide. We measured site‐identified goals for the program and indicators of success, number of adopting sites, and participants in their programs. Results: From January 2019 to December 2021, 80 sites expressed interest in adopting the program, 14 (18%) sites adopted it, and 10 of these sites have begun caring for patients. Another 4 sites have implemented the program as part of a randomized clinical trial. To date, over 1690 persons living with dementia and their caregivers have received Alzheimer's and Dementia Care (ADC) care at 14 adopting sites. Key lessons from the early dissemination efforts include the importance of identifying a strong product champion at the adopting site, creating a business case for adoption, training of clinical staff and adapting the model to fit local cultures and workflow, as well as recognizing the likely long length of time needed for the decision to adopt and implementation process. Conclusions: Despite many obstacles to dissemination, with local champions and technical assistance, successful innovations in dementia care can be implemented in diverse health systems. The ability to adopt sites to bring the program to full scale and achieve comparable outcomes to the original program remains to be determined.

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 · 10.1111/jgs.17900

Cites

16 of 16 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?

  • When dementia caregiver interventions are implemented, they are generally successful at improving how caregiver services are delivered and have the potential to reach many families while helping caregivers cope with their responsibilities.

    “When interventions are implemented, they are generally successful at improving how caregiver services are delivered and have the potential to reach a large number of families while also helping caregivers cope with their responsibilities (this includes the Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline).[560][561][562]”

    From 2023 Alzheimer's disease facts and figures (2023) · cites this paper as [562]

    The Introduction reports that numerous dementia caregiver interventions improve caregiver efficacy, and the Results report that the ADC program reached more than 1,690 people with dementia and their caregivers at adopting sites. But the paper does not establish that implemented interventions are generally successful at improving service delivery: it emphasizes limited uptake, and outcomes at adopting sites were not yet reported. It also does not evaluate the Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    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
Reuben, D. B., Evertson, L. C., Jackson‐Stoeckle, R., Epstein‐Lubow, G., Spragens, L. H., Haggerty, K. L., Serrano, K. S., & Jennings, L. A.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Education Development Center, Inc. Waltham Massachusetts USA
  • Alpert Medical School of Brown University Providence Rhode Island USA
  • Spragens and Associates (United States) (US)
  • Education Development Center (US)
  • University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center (US)
Corresponding author
Reuben, David B.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-06-09
Volume
70
Issue
9
Pages
2686-2694
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W4281684907
Cited by
24
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5
FWCI
6.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (R21AG054681)
  • Commonwealth Fund
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
Keywords
dementia care, innovation dissemination, program adoption, implementation barriers, product champions, technical assistance, clinical staff training, health care system, caregivers
MeSH terms
Alzheimer Disease, Delivery of Health Care, Dementia, Humans, Caregivers

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