Dementia friendly initiatives: A state of the science review

Dementia ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 1858-1895 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine A Hebert ◽  
Kezia Scales
Keyword(s):  
Interdisciplinary Collaboration ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Current Evidence Base ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
State Of The Science

Background Dementia friendly initiatives share similarities with the age-friendly movement in a focus on active engagement and creating a good quality of life for older adults. Dementia friendly initiatives offer a welcoming optimistic narrative in dementia studies by embracing dignity, empowerment, and autonomy to enable well-being throughout the dementia trajectory. Purpose The purpose of this review is to explore the current science of dementia friendly initiatives, identify gaps, and inform future research. Method Quantitative, qualitative, and conceptual/theoretical peer-reviewed dementia friendly research literature were evaluated for their current evidence base and theoretical underpinnings. Results The dementia friendly initiatives research base is primarily qualitative and descriptive focused on environmental design, dementia awareness and education, and the development of dementia friendly communities. Person-centered care principles appear in dementia friendly initiatives centered in care settings. Strong interdisciplinary collaboration is present. Research is needed to determine the effect of dementia friendly initiatives on stakeholder-driven and community-based outcomes. Due to the contextual nature of dementia, the perspective of persons with dementia should be included as dementia friendly initiatives are implemented. Theory-based studies are needed to confirm dementia friendly initiative components and support rigorous evaluation. Dementia friendly initiatives broaden the lens from which dementia is viewed.

scholarly journals Interventions for challenging behaviour in intellectual disability

2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 184-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Afia Ali ◽  
Jessica Blickwedel ◽  
Angela Hassiotis
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Disability ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
List Type ◽  
Challenging Behaviour ◽  
Pharmacological Treatments ◽  
Current Evidence Base ◽  
The Individual

SummaryChallenging behaviour is common in intellectual disability but it is difficult to diagnose and manage. It can adversely affect the quality of life of the individual and cause the breakdown of community placements, resulting in hospital admission. This article discusses the aetiology of challenging behaviour (including the complex relationship with mental illness), diagnostic problems, the current evidence base in relation to psychosocial and pharmacological treatments, and service delivery.LEARNING OBJECTIVES•Understand the aetiological basis of challenging behaviour.•Understand the role of functional analysis.•Appreciate the evidence base in relation to the psychological and pharmacological treatment of challenging behaviour.

Co-offending and Co-offender Selection

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah B. van Mastrigt
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Target Selection ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Current Theory ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Current Evidence Base ◽  
Event Planning ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Selection Of

A notable proportion of crime is committed in company, particularly during youth, but relatively little attention has been paid to the influence of co-offenders on criminal decision making. This chapter reviews current theory and research on co-offending as it relates to three aspects of offender decision making: the decision to (co)-offend, the selection of accomplices, and choices shaping the characteristics of the criminal event (planning, target selection, and seriousness). Both implicit and explicit decision making are considered, as well as situations in which the offense is premeditated and collaboration is explicitly sought after a plan has been made and situations in which the motivation to offend develops in a group of preformed individuals who become co-offenders by committing the act. The chapter concludes with a discussion of gaps in the current evidence base and directions for future research.

A Systematic Review of the Qualitative Evidence for the Use of Lifestyle Planning in People with Learning Disabilities

1999 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 148-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Rowe ◽  
A. Rudkin
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Learning Disabilities ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
Current Evidence Base

Lifestyle planning (LP) for people with learning disabilities is largely supported by qualitative rather than quantitative research. LP is a time-consuming and potentially resource-intensive area of practice which is becoming more prevalent in the UK. We present the first systematic review of the qualitative evidence base for the use of LP in people with learning disabilities. Such evidence concerns the special characteristics of LP and its outcomes in descriptive rather than quantitative terms. Qualitative research is usually aimed at enhancing validity by grounding theory in data collected. Twenty-one studies passed eligibility criteria for inclusion in this review, but only ten provided any outcome data, the others being concerned with process only. A replicable search strategy was employed and the resulting original data sources were critically reviewed with respect to major concepts and categories in the areas of: planning process, choices and preferences, ethics and outcomes. Explicitly person-centred approaches such as essential lifestyle planning are contrasted with more service-led methods such as individual programme planning. There are major methodological limitations in much of the available literature and suggestions for future research to clarify matters are made. The current evidence base suggests that no form of LP has significantly better outcomes than any other form and that it is not clear if LP in general enhances outcomes. Ongoing use of person centred planning in particular is informed by ethical considerations and is evolving in its structure and function.

Exploring the efficacy of housing alternatives for adults with an acquired brain or spinal injury: A systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Courtney J. Wright ◽  
Jacinta Colley ◽  
Elizabeth Kendall
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Residential Care ◽  
Community Integration ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Supported Accommodation ◽  
Current Evidence Base ◽  
Cord Injury

AbstractObjective:Housing for people with acquired brain injury (ABI) or spinal cord injury (SCI) remains a significant issue in Australia and internationally. This review examined the current research evidence regarding the efficacy of housing alternatives for adults with ABI or SCI in relation to four principal outcomes of interest: the person’s (1) community integration/participation, (2) independence, (3) psychosocial well-being and (4) quality of life. The review also sought to identify how the reported efficacy of the housing alternatives might be impacted by individual factors.Method:For this systematic review, quantitative empirical, peer-reviewed research published after 1 January 2003 was sought. Ten journal articles met the eligibility criteria. None of the included studies comprised an adult SCI sample.Results:The research identified lower levels of community integration/participation, independence, psychosocial well-being and quality of life for adults (particularly younger adults) with ABI living in ‘structured settings’ (i.e., residential care) compared to those living in ‘home-like’ environments (i.e., private homes) and ‘disability-specific’ settings (i.e., shared supported accommodation, group homes, foster care homes, cluster units).Conclusion:More research is needed to compare ‘home-like’ and ‘disability-specific’ settings, and individual housing models more generally (i.e., living at home with friends vs with family vs living in shared supported accommodation vs living in residential care). This review identified a number of limitations in the current evidence base and several important directions for future research. Policymakers, architects, designers, builders, developers, funding agencies, international researchers as well as people with ABI or SCI and their families may benefit from the findings of this review.

scholarly journals Nonpharmacological Interventions to Improve Depression, Anxiety, and Quality of Life (QoL) in People With Dementia: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naoko Kishita ◽  
Tamara Backhouse ◽  
Eneida Mioshi
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Cognitive Stimulation ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
People With Dementia ◽  
Current Evidence Base

This overview aimed to systematically synthesize evidence from existing systematic reviews to signpost practitioners to the current evidence base on nonpharmacological interventions to improve depression, anxiety, and quality of life (QoL) in people with dementia and to discuss priorities for future research. The databases MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched in August 2017 with an updated search in January 2019. Fourteen systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of nonpharmacological interventions were identified. Dementia stage was rated moderate or severe in the majority of the reviews and type of dementia varied. Interventions reported to be effective were cognitive stimulation (QoL: standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.38), music-based therapeutic interventions (depression: SMD = −0.27, anxiety: SMD = −0.43, QoL: SMD = 0.32), and psychological treatments (mainly cognitive behavior therapy; depression: SMD = −0.22, anxiety: MD = −4.57). Although health-care professionals are recommended to continue using these approaches, future research needs to focus on the type and form of interventions that are most effective for different stages and types of dementia.

scholarly journals Unpacking the Relationship between Parenting and Poverty: Theory, Evidence and Policy

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent La Placa ◽  
Judy Corlyon
Keyword(s):  
Causal Relationship ◽  
Parental Stress ◽  
Parenting Practices ◽  
Child Outcomes ◽  
Child Poverty ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Current Evidence Base ◽  
The Relationship

Policy discourses around child poverty and its causes and effects on families emerged in the 1990s, culminating in the Coalition government's emphasis on the quality of couple relations in improving child outcomes and in reducing child poverty. This article reviews and updates the current evidence base around the relationship between parenting and poverty. Evidence suggests an intricate relationship between complex and mediating processes of, for instance, income, parental stress, disrupted parenting practices and neighbourhoods and environments, as opposed to a simplistic causal relationship between poverty, parenting and child outcomes. The article then proceeds to suggest responses to enhance the evidence and research. Lastly, it considers the implications for child poverty policy, arguing that current responses are too simplistic and do not sufficiently reflect the evidence base.

scholarly journals Lighting in the Home and Health: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 609
Author(s):  
Oluwapelumi Osibona ◽  
Bethlehem D. Solomon ◽  
Daniela Fecht
Keyword(s):  
Light Exposure ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Housing Quality ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Current Evidence Base ◽  
Specific Health

Poor housing is an important determinant of poor health. One key aspect of housing quality is lighting. Light is important for visual performance and safety, and also plays a vital role in regulating human physiological functions. This review aims to synthesise existing evidence on the relationship between lighting in the home and health and recommends areas for future research. Three databases were searched for relevant literature using pre-defined inclusion criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Extracted data were qualitatively synthesised according to type of lighting (natural light, artificial light and light at night) and stratified by broad health domains (physical, mental and sleep health). Of the 4043 records retrieved, 28 studies met the inclusion criteria. There was considerable heterogeneity in light exposure metrics used and specific health outcome assessed by the studies. Lighting in the home can negatively affect health but the current evidence base is limited to a small number of studies in different domains of light and health. Further research surrounding specific health outcomes is required to better inform housing quality assessments and lighting practises in the home.

Biobehavioral Psycho-Oncology Interventions

2021 ◽  
pp. 654-660
Author(s):  
Michael A. Hoyt ◽  
Frank J. Penedo
Keyword(s):  
Well Being ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Biological Mechanisms ◽  
Physiological Processes ◽  
Biobehavioral Intervention ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Cancer Trajectory

Interventions in psycho-oncology have strong evidence for improving health-related quality of life, reducing distress, and enhancing emotional and physical well-being across the cancer trajectory. An expansion of this work has taken a biobehavioral focus. Biobehavioral interventions target the biological mechanisms and processes underlying cancer-relevant outcomes. The goals of such biobehavioral interventions have included altering physiological processes of stress and distress, relieving cancer-related symptoms by targeting common biological mechanisms, and promoting slower disease progression. This chapter provides a brief overview of this work including conceptual frameworks, an introduction to the commonly targeted intervention-sensitive biomarkers, and an examination of current evidence for biobehavioral intervention efficacy. Developing the evidence base and enhancing the clinical impact of biobehavioral interventions are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document