“I Didn’t Sign Up for This”: Perspectives from Persons Living with Dementia and Care Partners on Challenges, Supports, and Opportunities to Add Geriatric Neuropalliative Care to Dementia Specialty Care
Open accessAbstract
Background: In the United States, dementia specialty centers affiliated with centers of excellence for research hold promise as locations to develop innovative, holistic care in care systems otherwise siloed by discipline or payer. Objective: We conducted foundational research to inform development of patient-and family-centered palliative care interventions for dementia specialty centers. Methods: We interviewed persons living with dementia (PLWD), current, and former care partners (CP) recruited from a specialty dementia clinic and purposively selected for variation across disease syndrome and stage. A framework method of thematic analysis included coding, analytic matrices, and pattern mapping. Results: 40 participants included 9 PLWD, 16 current CPs, and 15 former CPs of decedents; 48% impacted by Alzheimer’s disease dementia. While help from family, support groups and adult day centers, paid caregiving, and sensitive clinical care were invaluable to PLWD, CPs, or both, these supports were insufficient to navigate the extensive challenges. Disease-oriented sources of distress included symptoms, functional impairment and falls, uncertainty and loss, and inaccessible care. Social and relational challenges included constrained personal and professional opportunities. The obligation and toll of giving or receiving caregiving were challenging. Clinical care challenges for PLWD and/or CPs included care fragmentation, insufficient guidance to inform planning and need for expert interdisciplinary clinical care at home. Conclusion: Findings highlight the breadth and gravity of gaps, which surpass the disciplinary focus of either behavioral neurology or palliative care alone. Results can inform the development of novel interventions to add principles of geriatrics and neuropalliative care to dementia care.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Limited research has demonstrated that people with dementia and care partners receive suboptimal anticipatory guidance related to prognosis and planning.
“Limited research has demonstrated that PWD and CPs receive suboptimal anticipatory guidance related to prognosis and planning.15,20”
From Care setting transitions for people with dementia: Qualitative perspectives of current and former care partners (2023) · cites this paper as [20]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 64 · Cited by 18
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- [24]National Coalition for Hospice and Palliative Care (2018) Clinical Practice Guidelines for Quality Palliative Care, 4th edition.
- [27]Creswell JW (2006) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches, Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, California.
- [32]Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, California.
- [33]Marshall C, Rossman GB (2006) Designing Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, California.
- [60]Adrion EA, Boyd ND, Ritchie CS, Naasan G, Harrison KL (Under review) Health Care Utilization Among Dementia Care Clinic Attendees in the Last Three Years of Life.
- Authors
- Harrison, K. L., Garrett, S. B., Halim, M., Bernstein Sideman, A., Allison, T. A., Dohan, D., Naasan, G., Miller, B. L., Smith, A. K., & Ritchie, C. S.
- Affiliations
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
- San Francisco VA Medical Center (US)
- Mount Sinai Hospital (US)
- Corresponding author
- Harrison, Krista L.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2022-11-22
- Volume
- 90
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1301-1320
- ISSN
- 1387-2877 (ISSN-L)
- 1875-8908
- PMC
- PMC9712265
- OpenAlex
- W4306178336
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 64
- Citations by year
- 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 3.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Alzheimer s Disease (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (KL2TR001870)
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (T32HS022241)
- National Institute on Aging (K24AG068312, L30 AG060590, K07AG066814, K23AG062613, K01AG059831, K01AG059840, DP1AG069809, P30AG044281)
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
- Keywords
- dementia, neuropalliative care
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Dementia, Geriatrics, Humans, Palliative Care, 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